[Qgis-developer] protected members to be considered API ?

[Matthias Kuhn]

On 01/27/2016 04:34 PM, Sandro Santilli wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:04:20AM +0100, Sandro Santilli wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 09:49:48AM +0100, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>>> Anything not LIB_EXPORTed (or private) should be considered an
>>> implementation detail,
>> What about protected members ?
> For example:
>
> class CORE_EXPORT QgsFeatureRendererV2
>
>     protected static const unsigned char* _getPoint(
>       QPointF& pt, QgsRenderContext& context,
>       const unsigned char* wkb // <-- no boundary info !
>     );
>
> --strk;
I'd not treat protected different from public, both are accessible for
external code.

If it's possible to keep the old API in place and have it deprecated, it
is preferable. If not, I think it's ok to break things for the few devs
that actually use it.

My 2 cents,
Matthias

-- 
Matthias Kuhn
OPENGIS.ch - https://www.opengis.ch
Spatial • (Q)GIS • PostGIS • Open Source


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20160127/7cec21a8/attachment.sig>