[zeromq-dev] Making language bindings work with both maint andmaster

[Martin Sustrik]

Joshua,

That may actually work.

Thoughts anyone?

Martin

On 10/03/2010 03:12 AM, Joshua Foster wrote:
>    Another approach is to tag the binding's baseline with the version
> that it matches. That way if we want to use 2.0.8, we just update to
> that tag. If there is a version specific fix, we can always create a
> small branch for that version.
>
> Joshua
>
> On 10/2/2010 4:34 PM, Mikko Koppanen wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Martin Sustrik<sustrik at 250bpm.com>   wrote:
>>> On 10/02/2010 09:59 PM, gonzalo diethelm wrote:
>>>> My suggestion was to have #define macros to identify the version of 0MQ
>>>> against which a binding is being compiled. Something like ZMQ_MAJOR,
>>>> ZMQ_MINOR, etc. Or a single #define ZMQ_VERSION to 20101002 (YYYYMMDD).
>>> Yeah, something like that. Let's see what other binding maintainer say
>>> about the topic.
>> Hi,
>>
>> Things such as ZMQ_TYPE are easy to ifdef out based on the constant
>> but breaks in functionality or API are possibly harder without
>> 'pre-processor-checkable' version number.
>>
>> Let's say I wanted certain functionality to be present if libzmq
>> version is 2.1.1 or higher.
>>
>> With version id it would be the following (major,three digits for
>> minor,three digits for patch)
>>
>> #if ZMQ_VERSION_ID>= 2001001
>>
>> Where as with ZMQ_MAJOR/MINOR/PATCH it would be:
>>
>> #if ZMQ_MAJOR>   2 || (ZMQ_MAJOR == 2&&   ZMQ_MINOR>= 1&&   ZMQ_PATCH>= 1)
>>
>> I guess this is a matter of taste but I prefer the former one (there
>> is no harm in defining both).
>>
>>
>> What would be the benefit of using YYYYMMDD instead of the actual
>> version number?
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev