on Wed Jul 16 2008, "Robert Ramey" <ramey-AT-rrsd.com> wrote:
Emil Dotchevski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey@rrsd.com> wrote:
Here is where we differ. Now when someone checks in a breaking change. errors pop up all over the place in test results that the author who caused the problem doesn't have any reason to check. He who has had his library broken has to investigate the cause of the sudden breakage and trace down to its source and then complain. This is a huge pain in the neck and costs a lot of time and frustration.
You're making a big assumption here, which is that the breaking change is a bug.
LOL - I call it a bug - you can call it a feature. Regardless, it is an (unannounced) interface change.
Whether it's announced or not matters a lot, but in this conversation both you and Emil have consistently failed to make a distinction AFAICT. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com