> ... ignores the reality of API design. Who would ever start with dangerous_load? When I wrote the Texcaller library, which simplifies compiling (La)TeX code,

> ... ignores the reality of API design. Who would ever start with dangerous_load? When I wrote the Texcaller library, which simplifies compiling (La)TeX code, I disabled dangerous features such as "write18" from the very beginning. I you don't take basic elements such as "secure/unsecure" variants into account, you're no really doing API design. You then just have a historically grown API, which is not necessarily bad in itself, but doesn't qualify to be called API design. > But that removes backwards compatibility. And people don't update legacy software. So then old software becomes vulnerable to who knows how many other security problems because of it's obsolescence. In that case, at least only old hard-to-update legacy software is affected, and not all the other (good, mostly well-written) software that is written today and in the future. Of course, don't forget to increase the major version number, as for every API change that breaks backward compatibility.