celix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Miroslav Beranič <miroslav.bera...@mibesis.si>
Subject Re: const pointers
Date Tue, 12 Jul 2016 08:37:30 GMT
Hi Pepijn,

I am not senior Celix developer, but ... +1 for the change.

Rgds,
Miroslav


2016-07-10 13:15 GMT+02:00 Pepijn Noltes <pepijnnoltes@gmail.com>:
> Hi All,
>
> The last days I worked on two issues introducing the usage of const
> pointers to the celix API (CELIX-249 and CELIX-365).
> The usage of const pointers where added because it gives a (IMO) cleaner
> API, helps to prevent bugs, and makes it possible to use string defines
> without casting.
>
> To give an example the properties_get function now return a 'const char*'
> instead of a 'char*'.
> This means that the content of returned string cannot be modified without
> casting to char* (which you should not do).
> It is good to know that freeing a string also is not allowed (this is
> considered modifying the content of the string).
> By applying this change I already discovered some (dormant) bugs where the
> return values of property_get where fed
> to strtok_r (which modified the content of the string).
>
> The big issues with these changes is that they are not backwards
> compatible, which is also the reason why issue CELIX-249 was not picked up
> earlier.
> Changing an input argument from 'char*' to 'const char*' is fine (you can
> still feed it with 'char*'), but changing the return or output argument
> from 'char*'/'char**' to 'const char*'/'const char**' is backwards
> incompatible.
> I took the liberty to apply these changes regardless, because were are
> working on a major version increase for Celix (2.0.0) and as stated above
> it has advantages.
>
> Also for register/getting services, const pointers where added. I this case
> I did _not_ change the API of bundleContext_getService,
> service_factory->(un)getService and serviceRefernce_getService, because
> this has IMO too much impact on existing code. Because the dependency
> manager is fairly new I did change the service callback signatures of the
> dependency manager and as result the examples using the dependency manager.
>
> All in all the result is that most code using the development branch of
> Celix needs some (small) changes to work with these updates.
> Any thought/comments are welcome.
>
> Greetings,
> Pepijn



-- 
Miroslav Beranič
MIBESIS
+386(0)40/814-843
miroslav.beranic@mibesis.si
http://www.mibesis.si

Mime
View raw message