123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202 |
- <!--{
- "Title": "Go 1 and the Future of Go Programs",
- "Path": "/doc/go1compat"
- }-->
- <h2 id="introduction">Introduction</h2>
- <p>
- The release of Go version 1, Go 1 for short, is a major milestone
- in the development of the language. Go 1 is a stable platform for
- the growth of programs and projects written in Go.
- </p>
- <p>
- Go 1 defines two things: first, the specification of the language;
- and second, the specification of a set of core APIs, the "standard
- packages" of the Go library. The Go 1 release includes their
- implementation in the form of two compiler suites (gc and gccgo),
- and the core libraries themselves.
- </p>
- <p>
- It is intended that programs written to the Go 1 specification will
- continue to compile and run correctly, unchanged, over the lifetime
- of that specification. At some indefinite point, a Go 2 specification
- may arise, but until that time, Go programs that work today should
- continue to work even as future "point" releases of Go 1 arise (Go
- 1.1, Go 1.2, etc.).
- </p>
- <p>
- Compatibility is at the source level. Binary compatibility for
- compiled packages is not guaranteed between releases. After a point
- release, Go source will need to be recompiled to link against the
- new release.
- </p>
- <p>
- The APIs may grow, acquiring new packages and features, but not in
- a way that breaks existing Go 1 code.
- </p>
- <h2 id="expectations">Expectations</h2>
- <p>
- Although we expect that the vast majority of programs will maintain
- this compatibility over time, it is impossible to guarantee that
- no future change will break any program. This document is an attempt
- to set expectations for the compatibility of Go 1 software in the
- future. There are a number of ways in which a program that compiles
- and runs today may fail to do so after a future point release. They
- are all unlikely but worth recording.
- </p>
- <ul>
- <li>
- Security. A security issue in the specification or implementation
- may come to light whose resolution requires breaking compatibility.
- We reserve the right to address such security issues.
- </li>
- <li>
- Unspecified behavior. The Go specification tries to be explicit
- about most properties of the language, but there are some aspects
- that are undefined. Programs that depend on such unspecified behavior
- may break in future releases.
- </li>
- <li>
- Specification errors. If it becomes necessary to address an
- inconsistency or incompleteness in the specification, resolving the
- issue could affect the meaning or legality of existing programs.
- We reserve the right to address such issues, including updating the
- implementations. Except for security issues, no incompatible changes
- to the specification would be made.
- </li>
- <li>
- Bugs. If a compiler or library has a bug that violates the
- specification, a program that depends on the buggy behavior may
- break if the bug is fixed. We reserve the right to fix such bugs.
- </li>
- <li>
- Struct literals. For the addition of features in later point
- releases, it may be necessary to add fields to exported structs in
- the API. Code that uses unkeyed struct literals (such as pkg.T{3,
- "x"}) to create values of these types would fail to compile after
- such a change. However, code that uses keyed literals (pkg.T{A:
- 3, B: "x"}) will continue to compile after such a change. We will
- update such data structures in a way that allows keyed struct
- literals to remain compatible, although unkeyed literals may fail
- to compile. (There are also more intricate cases involving nested
- data structures or interfaces, but they have the same resolution.)
- We therefore recommend that composite literals whose type is defined
- in a separate package should use the keyed notation.
- </li>
- <li>
- Methods. As with struct fields, it may be necessary to add methods
- to types.
- Under some circumstances, such as when the type is embedded in
- a struct along with another type,
- the addition of the new method may break
- the struct by creating a conflict with an existing method of the other
- embedded type.
- We cannot protect against this rare case and do not guarantee compatibility
- should it arise.
- </li>
- <li>
- Dot imports. If a program imports a standard package
- using <code>import . "path"</code>, additional names defined in the
- imported package in future releases may conflict with other names
- defined in the program. We do not recommend the use of <code>import .</code>
- outside of tests, and using it may cause a program to fail
- to compile in future releases.
- </li>
- <li>
- Use of package <code>unsafe</code>. Packages that import
- <a href="/pkg/unsafe/"><code>unsafe</code></a>
- may depend on internal properties of the Go implementation.
- We reserve the right to make changes to the implementation
- that may break such programs.
- </li>
- </ul>
- <p>
- Of course, for all of these possibilities, should they arise, we
- would endeavor whenever feasible to update the specification,
- compilers, or libraries without affecting existing code.
- </p>
- <p>
- These same considerations apply to successive point releases. For
- instance, code that runs under Go 1.2 should be compatible with Go
- 1.2.1, Go 1.3, Go 1.4, etc., although not necessarily with Go 1.1
- since it may use features added only in Go 1.2
- </p>
- <p>
- Features added between releases, available in the source repository
- but not part of the numbered binary releases, are under active
- development. No promise of compatibility is made for software using
- such features until they have been released.
- </p>
- <p>
- Finally, although it is not a correctness issue, it is possible
- that the performance of a program may be affected by
- changes in the implementation of the compilers or libraries upon
- which it depends.
- No guarantee can be made about the performance of a
- given program between releases.
- </p>
- <p>
- Although these expectations apply to Go 1 itself, we hope similar
- considerations would be made for the development of externally
- developed software based on Go 1.
- </p>
- <h2 id="subrepos">Sub-repositories</h2>
- <p>
- Code in sub-repositories of the main go tree, such as
- <a href="//golang.org/x/net">golang.org/x/net</a>,
- may be developed under
- looser compatibility requirements. However, the sub-repositories
- will be tagged as appropriate to identify versions that are compatible
- with the Go 1 point releases.
- </p>
- <h2 id="operating_systems">Operating systems</h2>
- <p>
- It is impossible to guarantee long-term compatibility with operating
- system interfaces, which are changed by outside parties.
- The <a href="/pkg/syscall/"><code>syscall</code></a> package
- is therefore outside the purview of the guarantees made here.
- As of Go version 1.4, the <code>syscall</code> package is frozen.
- Any evolution of the system call interface must be supported elsewhere,
- such as in the
- <a href="//golang.org/x/sys">go.sys</a> subrepository.
- For details and background, see
- <a href="//golang.org/s/go1.4-syscall">this document</a>.
- </p>
- <h2 id="tools">Tools</h2>
- <p>
- Finally, the Go tool chain (compilers, linkers, build tools, and so
- on) are under active development and may change behavior. This
- means, for instance, that scripts that depend on the location and
- properties of the tools may be broken by a point release.
- </p>
- <p>
- These caveats aside, we believe that Go 1 will be a firm foundation
- for the development of Go and its ecosystem.
- </p>
|