RE: [PEAR-DEV] [RFC_v3] Handling Backwards Compatibility in PEAR [hopefully the final draft]

> From: Tobias Schlitt [mailto:tobias@schlitt.info] > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:01 PM > Nice stuff, really. Everything ok, except one thing I'd more or less like > to > add. > > Am Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:36 PM [GMT+0100=CET], > artikulierte Greg Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net>: > > > > API: "Application Program Interface" is the connection between a > > package and the programs that use it. This includes class and method > > names, parameters that are passed to methods, and constant names, or > > any other publicly accessible area of a program. Elements explicitly > > marked as private data/methods are excluded from this definition. > > I think there should be some extension to changes of parameters on > functions > and methods. IMHO it should be allowed to add more parameters to a > function/method without doing the needed steps of BC change under those > conditions: > > 1) The parameter added has to have a default value (optional parameter). > 2) This default value has to match the functionality the package had > before > adding the new parameter. > > What do you all think about that? While not specifically mentioned making BC "hacks" (in the positive sense) like that obviously prevent any BC issues and therefore the whole issue doesn't come up. Regards, Lukas