On Thu, 09 Feb 2023 17:03:19 +0000 Simon Ser <contact@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thursday, February 9th, 2023 at 17:38, Joshua Ashton <joshua@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I mean, the strings are the uAPI, not the integers, right? > > > > Both are uAPI these days. > > Yes. The integers are uAPI, if you change them you'll break libliftoff > users. There is an old thread discussing this somewhere. The tl;dr was > that there is no use-case for exposing the same string with a different > integer, so no good reason to justify the substantial complexity of > handling this case. Funny, I remember exactly the opposite. This case would have been multiple different strings with the same integer, anyway. But no matter. If a uAPI header or documentation has exposed the integers, then there is no taking that back. This won't be a problem for enums that have no meaningful string names, like enums where the integer names a blob that describes what the value means, and enums where the integer is an index into an array of descriptions exposed as a blob. Thanks, pq
Attachment:
pgpy5T2saE2VM.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
