[Libreoffice] consistent namespaces & future breakage ...

Bjoern Michaelsen bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Wed Apr 20 10:59:13 PDT 2011

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:41:16 +0100
Michael Meeks <michael.meeks at novell.com>

> 	:-) from 10k feet anything in clone/ure/ is the public
Including the sometimes very creative library naming.

> 	That includes some monumental performance blunders - such as
> the 'store' code, and the IDL interfaces (in theory only the ones
> marked 'published' in the IDL).
Marked published and not marked deprecated.

> 	Just UNO; and of course key behaviours of the actual UNO
> interfaces themselves - as implemented all over the place ;-)

That is the hard part, because some things are the good old "the
implementation is the specification" in many ways (for example for some
darker corners of sw). Having good unittests there would also help to
find a saner specification:
- "behaving like a unittest expects" leaves a lot more room for
  improvement than
- "behaves exactly like the old implementation did".
While still some clients will break (because they coded against the
implementation -- and they are not to blame for it, as there are few
unittests and "prosaic documentation" is way to vague in general), it
will be easier to fix if testcode documents how one should use the API.




More information about the LibreOffice mailing list