[openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

[Judson Wilson]

If some users find 1.1 to be a worse alternative to 1.0.2, but they have
the power to use a very new version of 1.0.2, then this makes sense for
reverse compatibility.

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Peter Waltenberg <pwalten at au1.ibm.com>
wrote:

> The point of using accessor FUNCTIONS is that the code doesn't break if
> the structure size or offsets of fields in the underlying structures change
> across binaries.
>
> Where that mainly has an impact is updating the crypto/ssl libs underneath
> existing binaries is more likely to just work.
>
> #defines in the headers do not help at all here.
>
>
> Peter
>
>
> -----"openssl-dev" <openssl-dev-bounces at openssl.org> wrote: -----
> To: openssl-dev at openssl.org
> From: Richard Moore
> Sent by: "openssl-dev"
> Date: 01/10/2016 11:20AM
> Subject: Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter
> functions
>
>
>
>
> On 9 January 2016 at 22:45, Salz, Rich <rsalz at akamai.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > required to perform many operations. What do people think about
>> > backporting those accessors into the 1.0.2 branch?
>>
>> Another possibility is to have a just a single (new) header file that has
>> #define's for the accessors that turn into raw structure access.
>>
>>
> ​That would not help anyone who needs function pointers.​
>
>
> ​Rich.
> ​
>
> _______________________________________________
> openssl-dev mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openssl-dev mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-dev/attachments/20160110/21ba76b5/attachment.html>