Stability policy?

[nicolasfella]

We'd like to use QCoro in Plasma, but before we do that we'd like to know what kind of stability (in terms of API/ABI etc) we can expect from new QCoro versions.

We can probably live without ABI stability, but a (reasonably) stable API would be appreciated.

The readme says "This is a rather experimental library that helps me to understand coroutines in C++." Is that still accurate or has the project matured since writing that?

[nicolasfella]

See also https://invent.kde.org/plasma/plasma-nm/-/merge_requests/124

[danvratil]

Hi Nicolas,

after the changes in 0.4 and 0.5 - the library is modularized and everything returns Task<T> - I think the API can now be considered stable, I don't think there's need for any more breaking changes. Starting with 0.6, I'll be simply just deprecating old API (e.g. the entire Task header is deprecated in favor of QCoroTask header) but not removing it until next major release (which I'm not planning any time soon).

The readme says "This is a rather experimental library that helps me to understand coroutines in C++." Is that still accurate or has the project matured since writing that?

I understand coroutines now, so I guess that makes this library less experimental :-D I'll drop the sentence and replace it with some API stability guarantees.

I'm happy to see that you want to adopt QCoro in Plasma and understand the requirements, so I'll do what I can to make sure QCoro is usable for you folks :-)