interfaces / implementations separation (was Let's discuss KDevelop4 interfaces and shell)

[Matt Rogers]

On Friday 19 January 2007 4:52 pm, Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Friday 19 January 2007 20:47, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > By old, I assume you mean post 4.0 plugins. I don't think we could load
> > KDev 3.x plugins in KDev 4 even if we wanted to.
>
> Sure. I didn't have 3.x plugins in mind.
>
> > A layman's definition of BC means that we can add and deprecated, but we
> > can't change or remove existing functions.
>
> But you can't add virtual functions IIRC. And this is quite serious
> restriction for classes that combine interface with its implementation.
> Separation of interfaces vs implementation gives us additional freedom.

You're right. You can't add virtual functions. However, you can use signals 
and slots to provide the same sort of flexibility.

>
> > I think we need to maintain BC. Maintaining BC is not that hard. We've
> > done it pretty well for the KDE 3 series for quite awhile. Yes, there
> > have been some mess ups but for the most part, it's been quite
> > successful.
>
> Successful? In KDevelop 3? I don't think so providing that KDevelop plugin
> version has been constantly increasing (indicating incompatibilities).
>

I was talking about kdelibs here. Sorry. That's my fault for not being more 
specific.
-- 
Matt