Recent pull requests

[Greg Ercolano]

> Issue #1516 -- Fl_Terminal: make static sgr_blink, max_utf8, ring_srow, is_continuation

> [..]
>-    void sgr_blink(bool val)     { (void)val; /* NOT IMPLEMENTED */                     } // e.g. ESC[5m
>+    static void sgr_blink(bool val) { (void)val; /* NOT IMPLEMENTED */                    } // e.g. ESC[5m
> [..]

    Hmm, I coded it this way to ensure later implementation doesn't affect the ABI,
    and suggest we not make this change.

    Such a change not only breaks ABI to make the change, it would also necessitate
    another ABI breakage should this method be implemented later.

    Would like to suggest we carefully consider such changes; quite a few issues
    have been opened in the last few days that seem to not take into account code maintenance.

[Albrecht Schlosser]

On 7/15/26 19:00 Greg Ercolano wrote:

> Issue #1516 -- Fl_Terminal: make static sgr_blink, max_utf8, ring_srow, is_continuation

> [..]
>-    void sgr_blink(bool val)     { (void)val; /* NOT IMPLEMENTED */                     } // e.g. ESC[5m
>+    static void sgr_blink(bool val) { (void)val; /* NOT IMPLEMENTED */                    } // e.g. ESC[5m
> [..]

    Hmm, I coded it this way to ensure later implementation doesn't affect the ABI,
    and suggest we not make this change.

+1   (not to apply this)

This is one of these nonsense AI changes. A human editor would have read the comment and wouldn't have changed a "not implemented" function.

There are, however, some other places where making a class method 'static' makes sense (in theory), but doesn't bring real advantages.

[Greg Ercolano]

On 7/16/26 18:52, 'Albrecht Schlosser' via fltk.coredev wrote:

There are, however, some other places where making a class method 'static' makes sense (in theory), but doesn't bring real advantages.

    Right, like the other methods mentioned in that PR which will probably always return static data, and can certainly be marked static, but as you say for not much payoff (if any) for ABI breakage.

    That said, since we haven't released 1.5.0 yet, arguably it's a good time to make ABI breaking changes. I'm kinda +0 on the whole thing, veering towards -1 for "if it aint broke, don't fix it".

[Bill Spitzak]

Don't make the method static unless it is actually useful without an instance of the object.

If it is inline in the header, even if it calls a private static method, the compiler is smart enough to not waste time pushing this on the stack.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "fltk.coredev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fltkcoredev...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fltkcoredev/5fc16db5-16eb-468f-9c46-b05f172a162d%40seriss.com.