3 ms·
> I don't consider it backward compatibility in a strict sense. Just in the sense that 100% of the people who use the phrase "backward compatibility" mean.
by justin66 3y ago
> I don't consider it backward compatibility in a strict sense.
Just in the sense that 100% of the people who use the phrase "backward compatibility" mean.
- pizza234 3y agoSure, from a user perspective, but not from an operative perspective: in the cases of live binary patching, Microsoft required to call the application developer to be legally clear; in orther cases, APIs behave differently based on the executable being run. There's a lot more than just keeping the API stable.
- justin66 3y agoI get that my initial comment was a bit of a throwaway, but I can unpack it a bit. I think it’s a mistake to regard a working backward compatibility functionality as deficient because it requires maintenance and the cooperation of the parties involved. That’s just… engineering, right?