From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14102 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2010 18:29:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 14087 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jan 2010 18:29:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.network-theory.co.uk (HELO mail.network-theory.co.uk) (66.199.228.187) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 18:29:49 +0000 Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 18:29:00 -0000 Message-ID: <87r5q1vkeb.wl%bjg@network-theory.co.uk> From: Brian Gough To: Tuomo Keskitalo Cc: Gerard Jungman , GSL Discuss Mailing List Subject: Re: gsl container designs In-Reply-To: <4B4477B8.50305@iki.fi> References: <1259110486.3028.69.camel@manticore.lanl.gov> <4B4477B8.50305@iki.fi> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/22.1 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Message-Mac: ec8da3b20c1a7cbf7f61b3a1c1adaa6b Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-q1/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 At Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:44:56 +0200, Tuomo Keskitalo wrote: > Do you mean the compatibility to GSL 1 types by the compatibility cost? > When talking about GSL 2 I don't think we should give too much value to > maintaining backwards compatibility. GSL 1 is not going to cease to > exist, and people who have tied themselves deeply to GSL 1 data > structures can continue to use it. I'd say it's a significant benefit if people don't have to modify their code. -- Brian Gough