I worry about old (broken) code that accesses that field
directly.
OK, it's broken, but I don't want to be the one explaining
that to users who find that their code no longer compiles
because of poorly written code that happens to not be
called. (That's quite possible with error handling code).
OTOH, I was planning to do this (or rather a total purge)
very early in the 9.0 cycle.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80530
Patch updated to include headers
and tests. (Thanks jenglish!)
Logged In: YES
user_id=80530
Second patch goes beyond
disabling to completely
removing support for
interp->result access.
Logged In: YES
user_id=72656
Without looking at the patch, I assume that this was done
without changing the size of the Tcl_Interp structure, which
would cause ABI issues.
Logged In: YES
user_id=80530
correct. no fields are removed by the patch.
(though public access to them is).
Logged In: YES
user_id=79902
I worry about old (broken) code that accesses that field
directly.
OK, it's broken, but I don't want to be the one explaining
that to users who find that their code no longer compiles
because of poorly written code that happens to not be
called. (That's quite possible with error handling code).
OTOH, I was planning to do this (or rather a total purge)
very early in the 9.0 cycle.
Logged In: YES
user_id=80530
changed your tune a little bit since
you wrote the comment at lines 632-639
of tclResult.c, then? :D
Logged In: YES
user_id=79902
"Consistency is the sign of a small mind"
:-p