Non-public public functions: Conventions for identifying?

Cheetham, Anastasia acheetham at
Fri Nov 19 14:41:08 UTC 2010

On 2010-11-18, at 11:13 PM, Colin Clark wrote:

> 2. not guaranteed to remain consistent from release to release but visible out of courtesy to developers
>  I'd suggest that code in category 2 be given a status of "unsupported," and clearly marked as such in the code with a comment, as well as in the API reference pages.

+1 for the name, and for clearly indicating so.

> 1. in the process of becoming stable, core parts of Infusion
> Code in category 1 fits our established definition of the Sneak Peek and Preview statuses.

I would recommend we also mark these parts of our API with its status in the code itself. It means we need to pay attention to what's what at release time, and consider whether or not it's time to upgrade the status of something, but this is something we should be doing anyway.

Anastasia Cheetham     Inclusive Design Research Centre
acheetham at            Inclusive Design Institute
                                        OCAD University

More information about the fluid-work mailing list