backwards-compatibility

Can Visual Studio target earlier C# syntax in addition to earlier .NET framework versions?

阅读更多关于 Can Visual Studio target earlier C# syntax in addition to earlier .NET framework versions?

The easy part: Targeting the .NET 2.0 framework in a Visual Studio 2010 project using the dropdown. The hard part: Is it possible to target a specific syntax version - for example var s = "hello world" is valid syntactic sugar in VS2008 and above, but would not compile in VS2005. Can VS2010 be configured to flag this at compile time? This can be done by specifying the language version in the project settings. To set the language version to C# 2.0 do the following Right Click on the project and select "Properties" Go to the "Build" Tab Click the "Advanced" Button Change the "Language Version"

Any alternatives to Clirr (binary and source compatibility with older releases)? [closed]

阅读更多关于 Any alternatives to Clirr (binary and source compatibility with older releases)? [closed]

问题 Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow. Closed last year . We are using clirr(http://clirr.sourceforge.net) in our project but it looks very outdated. I've tried to search for any alternatives, but they are in the same position: JDiff(http://jdiff.sourceforge.net) Jar Compare(http://extradata.com/products/jarc/) So, I'm looking for community help: how are you solving a

do we need to recompile libraries with c++11?

阅读更多关于 do we need to recompile libraries with c++11?

This is a very uninformed question, but: I would like to start using C++11. Can I continue to use my large collection of libraries which were compiled with my old gcc 4.2.1 compiler or do I need to recompile them all with a new compiler? I would think (or hope) the answer is no, but I am only a dabbler. So that I may have at least part of my ignorance removed, can you explain why in either case? Thanks Yes, you should. The weaker reason is not binary compatibility, the problem is about expectations. A C++11 enabled compiler will expect a number of features to be available (move constructors

API design ensuring backward compatibility [closed]

阅读更多关于 API design ensuring backward compatibility [closed]

问题 Closed . This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post. Closed 12 months ago . Are there any best practices to keep in mind while designing API's which ensures backward compatibility and new version releases. Any links to articles/blogs is appreciated. 回答1: You should check out this presentation about API design. It's from Google and pretty good. It

How do you cleanly separate code for backwards compatibility from the main code?

阅读更多关于 How do you cleanly separate code for backwards compatibility from the main code?

问题 I'm interested in what strategies people have come up with for separating all the crufty logic that's necessary to maintain backwards compatibility from the main code of an application. In other words, strategies that let you come closer to having your code look as if there were no backwards compatibility concerns except for separate isolated source files distinctly for that task. For example, if your application reads a particular file format, instead of one giant honking file parsing

Old projects compatible with Java 7

阅读更多关于 Old projects compatible with Java 7

My old projects use Java 6 (1.6), and I don't know when I update (Java 7), they can run fine ? There is an official list of known incompatibilities between java 6 and java 7 from Oracle (including descriptions of both binary and source-level incompatibilities in public APIs). Also you can look at the independent analysis of API changes in the Java API Tracker project: http://abi-laboratory.pro/java/tracker/timeline/jre/ The report is generated by the japi-compliance-checker tool. They should do, yes. Java has a reasonably strong history of backward compatibility. However, if these are in any

How can I test the backward compatibility of API between .net assemblies

阅读更多关于 How can I test the backward compatibility of API between .net assemblies

I have an assembly that provides an API and is used by some other assemblies. I need to verify that a newer version of API dll is still compatible with the older assemblies that were using the older version of API. I've found a couple of questions that ask the same, but there are no answers that resolve my problem: Tool to verify compatibility of a public APIs Tool for backwards compatibility for the C#/.NET API Suggested tools can only compare two assemblies and say if there are possible breaking changes in API, but not if the newest API really breaks the older assembly that uses it. I'd like

Rules for C# class backward compatibility/avoiding breaking changes

阅读更多关于 Rules for C# class backward compatibility/avoiding breaking changes

问题 I'm working on a C# 3.5 assembly that is consumed by many different applications in an enterprise server environment. I would like to add some properties to an existing C# class (not abstract) and maintain backwards compatibility with current clients without recompiling. It’s a strongly named 3.5 assembly. Existing client applications will not be recompiled. Instead we use publisher policy assemblies to re-direct existing clients to the updated version. What are the rules for maintaining this

Why not remove type erasure from the next JVM?

阅读更多关于 Why not remove type erasure from the next JVM?

问题 Java introduced type erasure with generics in Java 5 so they would work on old versions of Java. It was a tradeoff for compatibility. We've since lost that compatibility[1] [2] [3]--bytecode can be run on later versions of the JVM but not earlier ones. This looks like the worse possible choice: we've lost type information and we still can't run bytecode compiled for newer versions of the JVM on older versions. What happened? Specifically I'm asking if there are any technical reasons why type

Android Lollipop - changed behavior of SQLite

阅读更多关于 Android Lollipop - changed behavior of SQLite

When testing one of my apps for Android 5.0 compatibility I found that one two of my SQL queries doesn't don't work as expected anymore on Lollipop. Both of my problems led to significantly different results on Lollipop compared to older Android versions. Below, I will describe those problems and their solutions more deeply in case you have similar issues. My main question is quite simple: Are those non-backwards compatible changes somewhere documented? Problem number one: MATCH It seems that the following query doesn't work anymore on Lollipop: SELECT title FROM ents JOIN ctt ON ctt.docid =