arphaman added inline comments.
================ Comment at: docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1347 + +In rare cases, the availability annotation on an API might be overly +conservative. For example, ``[NSProcessInfo processInfo]`` secretly responds to ---------------- thakis wrote: > arphaman wrote: > > We don't want to encourage usage of undocumented/private APIs before they > > are officially made public for a number of reasons. Can you please remove > > or rewrite this paragraph (ideally removing/replacing the specific example)? > I removed it from this patch, but this is something that's necessary every > now and then. If there's no guidance on this, chances are people will come up > with worse hacks :-) So I think having some documentation on this is a good > thing. Once this is in, I'll send out a follow-up and we can iterate on this > paragraph there (or decide to omit it and let each project decide on what to > do here.) Ok, sure. https://reviews.llvm.org/D35379 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
