lyle at knology.net
Thu Feb 9 16:27:55 EST 2006
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:37:29 +1300, Russell Fulton <r.fulton at auckland.ac.nz>
> Thanks, I'm new to both Ruby and fox so this is useful background.
> So what you are saying is that major improvement to FXRuby have been
> released to coincide with the fox releases. I can see why Lyle did
> this, I firmly believe that backward compatibility is often overrated
> even if it does cause short term pain.
> I seem to remember seeing that fox 1.6 is nearing release. Lyle are you
> planning any more major changes to the api? Just curious ;)
Let's be clear that I have no control over changes to the FOX API -- that's
Jeroen's call. And he *is* fond of making sweeping API changes when he goes
to a new major release of FOX. Most of the time, those changes are for good
reasons (e.g. to make things less confusing, or to make APIs consistent with
each other). Joel is correct that there were a number of major changes
between FOX versions 1.0 and 1.2, but that it wasn't as bad going from 1.2
to 1.4. In my opinion, you shouldn't experience much pain in going from 1.4
to 1.6, either.
When it's possible, I'll add some APIs to maintain backwards compatibility.
For example, when Jeroen removed the linkBefore() and linkAfter() member
functions from the FXWindow class in FOX 1.4, I added "pure Ruby" versions
of these methods (in FXRuby 1.4) so that old code wouldn't break. Sometimes
it's not that simple, though, and things get broken as a result. ;)
More information about the fxruby-users