Conversation

This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more

Apr 11, 2020

I always wanted to reason about this in Rust using a model logic where accessible worlds were “allowed” API evolution under semantic versioning.

aturon.github.io

Negative reasoning in Chalk

I’ve had the pleasure in recent weeks of working on Chalk, the project that Niko’s been blogging about:

Replying to

and

Didn't the Swift people look at something like this with their work on ABI compatibility? I've looked at their docs though but couldn't find anything comprehensive about it… cc.

@jckarter

11:03 PM · Apr 11, 2020Twitter Web App

Replying to

I'd be really interested if this could be done formally, and maybe even statically verified in the type system somehow… it'd be also really cool if it took account of stuff like conditional compilation.

Brendan Zabarauskas

@brendanzab

Apr 11, 2020

I'd also be interested in this from a language implementors perspective - can you reason about changes you can make to a language that preserve backwards compatibility with a previous version of the language?

Show replies

Replying to

and

There are a few different axes here; github.com/apple/swift/bl talks about the kinds of changes that are allowed without breaking ABI, but OP might be talking more about something like ObjC’s

@available

or swift’s #available for enforcing APIs are only used on supported versions?

github.com

swift/LibraryEvolution.rst at main · apple/swift

The Swift Programming Language. Contribute to apple/swift development by creating an account on GitHub.

Joe Groff

@jckarter

Apr 11, 2020

Swift does not yet do a great job of preventing new API additions from interfering with existing code, though that’s an area of interest for us in the near future

Show replies