Talk:Fragile binary interface problem
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Although there is a note saying that fragile binary interface problem (FBI) is different from fragile base class problem (FBC), the article itself is mixing the two concepts, especially the first sentence. Even, in the "Solutions" section, it talks inappropriately about FBC. Part of the section should be moved to Fragile base class. The link given should also be moved to Fragile base class.
FBI is not restricted to OO languages; it even has a longer history than OO languages, I think. Application binary interface describes the origin of FBI more appropriately, if I am right, and may be merged with this article.
Many authors refer to the syntactic fragile base class problem (which is what is described as the "fragile binary interface problem" on this page), and the semantic fragile base class problem (described on fragile base class problem).
FBC, FBI being mixed
[edit]I agree with the first comment on this article. FBI and FBC, are for most purposes very similar and in this article they claim them to be very different but actually end up describing FBC for the FBI problem.
- Exactly, in the solutions section it says: "The best solution to the fragile base class problem is..." while in the lead section it says: "Note: this problem is often confused with the fragile base class problem, which is different, but related." For this reason I have tagged the article with Template:Contradict. --Kprateek88(Talk | Contribs) 13:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)