Re: [Plplot-devel] Questions about PLUNICODE type, proposed change in PL_FCI_MARK, and C implementation questions

[<mj...@ga...>]

Alan W. Irwin writes:
 > Could I have some practical guidance from especially Maurice and Rafael (the
 > combined API concience for PLplot developers) please on whether it is okay
 > to go ahead and change PL_FCI_MARK from 0x10000000 to 0x80000000?  Rafael,
 > even if you say "go ahead" because you feel this is too inconsequential a
 > backwards-incompatible API change to worry about, I will still wait for
 > Maurice's "OK" as well.  I understand Maurice may be out of e-mail contact
 > for a while, but, Rafael, don't let that stop you from commenting sooner on
 > this API change.

I don't feel strongly on the matter.  Since it's a "relatively" new feature, I
think it's a given that there be some (suitably chosen) period of instability
before the interface completely crystallizes.  That's the price for being an
early adopter.  It also depends on how you pitch it to begin with.  If a new
capability is sufficiently complex that you feel like you need feedback in
order to understand all the angles, you might label it as "experimental" and
retain more latitude for changing things around later.  As long as we have
some reasonable bounds on the duration of "experimental" works in progress..
we obviously don't want the entire code base marked that way. :)

-- 
Maurice LeBrun    mj...@ga...