Skip to content

Remove macOS @available version restrictions. #1319

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

spevans
Copy link
Contributor

@spevans spevans commented Nov 14, 2017

Im not sure if this is valid, but restricting some methods to certain versions of macOS doesn't seem necessary here.

At the same time, some of there if #available that rely on Foundation don't seem to be needed given that they are contained in this version of Foundation.

Tested on linux and macOS 10.12

@parkera @phausler Is this ok or am I on the wrong track here?

@phausler
Copy link
Contributor

This will likely break our capability of copy/paste to and from the overlay

@parkera
Copy link
Contributor

parkera commented Nov 16, 2017

I agree with @phausler on trying to keep the source code in sync; that's the best option we have while we need to have these things in separate repositories.

I assume that generated interfaces would show these APIs as available since Linux and other platforms fall under the *.

@alblue
Copy link
Contributor

alblue commented Nov 16, 2017

I concur - although these are no-ops on Linux, they will introduce problems in future sync updates, so leaving them as is will be more appropriate.

@spevans
Copy link
Contributor Author

spevans commented Nov 16, 2017

I had forgotten about the code-sync issue and the only real value of this PR was it slightly simplified some of the tests in the Darwin compatibiltity testing (#1286) so its not really that important.

@spevans spevans closed this Nov 16, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants