8 Apr
2015
8 Apr
'15
10:57 p.m.
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:05 -0600, Robert P. Goldman wrote:
Faré wrote:
I need to look into a means to identify these problematic cases. Ugh.
MOP not standardized. Ugh ugh ugh ugh. I'll see if I can pilfer code from Closer-MOP to render ENSURE-CLASS accessible.
Is this the moral of this story: code that wishes to be backwards compatible and portable can NEVER change the class hierarchy above an API-visible class, because there is no *portable* way to detect when someone's code will be affected.
What if the previous hierarchy was plain buggy?
Then going forward we have to introduce a NEW class to replace the old class.
I hope you're only referring to new changes, not the ones that already happened.
--
Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.