On Friday, November 18, 2011 10:36 AM, "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpil...@collab.net> wrote: > On 11/18/2011 10:26 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > If we add a status->foo flag (like we added the status->changelist bit > > in 1.4), we would have to explicitly add it to this if() too --- which is > > too easy to forget. > > Do you have a concrete suggestion for making this future-proof?
No. > If not, > we'll simply have to trust that anyone brave enough to add such a new flag > is also either smart enough to review all consumers of the structure or "Review all consumers" is not really doable for a public API. > mature enough to deal with it when someone eventually blames him or her for > not doing so. :-) >
