[Xcb] xcb and protocol versions

Jeremy Kolb jkolb at brandeis.edu
Fri Feb 23 05:16:53 PST 2007

Barton C Massey wrote:
> In message <45DE3075.1070506 at brandeis.edu> you wrote:
>> An example of my concern is:
>> We have an extension Ext at version 1.0 and we have a request named func
>> that sends a CARD16 down the wire.
>> XCB would generate the following functions;
>> xcb_ext_func(..., CARD16)
>> Now if we have version 1.1 and let's say we still have request func but
>> it adds a CARD8 or something then we would have the function:
>> xcb_ext_func(..., CARD16, CARD8)
>> Will we ever run into a case like this or are people prohibited from
>> doing things like this?
> We've talked about this before, and decided that if someone
> changes the signature of a function in an extension rev,
> they darn well need to also change the name.  There's
> several good reasons to do it, and no good reason not to.
> If they don't, our XCB bits will choose a good new name for
> them anyhow. :-)
> 	Bart

Thanks Bart,

That's what I assumed.  Whew.


More information about the Xcb mailing list