Re: [VOLK] Release 2.5.1

Hi all,

while I did not run the ABI compliance checker to compare 2.5.0 vs 2.5.1
specifically, it is simple and can be done with this tool:
https://lvc.github.io/abi-compliance-checker/#ABI_Dumper
So far, we were able to keep the ABI compatible across VOLK 2.x.
Also, we didn't change any function signatures of existing functions.

It might be a worthwhile undertaking to add an ABI compliance checker to
our CI.

The VOLK library is written in C. Here, we rely on C11. Also, we require
cpu_features because detecting such features across systems and
architectures is terribly difficult.

Then, the questions are: Why Boost, why C++17 at all?
We use tools around our library. The volk_profile utility and our tests
are written in C++. Here, we need to write the profile results to a
file. In the past, we used `boost::filesystem` to achieve this.
`boost::filesystem` basically became part of C++17 with
`std::filesystem`. Thus, we use `std::filesystem` now.

Cheers
Johannes

On 13.02.22 12:08, Jeff Long wrote:
> Fons - filesystem is used for the volk_profile utility.
>
> Chris - do not assume ABI compatibility. A number of small things have
> changed in ".h" files.
>
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 6:19 PM Chris Vine <vine24683579@gmail.com
> <mailto:vine24683579@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 11:40:26 +0100
> Johannes Demel <demel@ant.uni-bremen.de
> <mailto:demel@ant.uni-bremen.de>> wrote:
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > You can find the news at
> https://www.libvolk.org/release-v251.html
> <https://www.libvolk.org/release-v251.html> as well.
> >
> > We have a new VOLK release! We are happy to announce VOLK v2.5.1! We
> > want to thank all contributors. This release wouldn't have been
> possible
> > without them.
>
> Hi,
>
> Is this ABI compatible with volk-2.5.0 (or put another way, if I
> upgrade from volk-2.5.0 will I need to recompile gnuradio)?
>
> Chris
>