I don't understand why that's true. Just add the new flag and use it for your new feature. Aren't buggy programs who were already sending the flag responsible for their own bugs?
I don't understand why that's true. Just add the new flag and use it for your new feature. Aren't buggy programs who were already sending the flag responsible for their own bugs?
When the kernel breaks userspace, it's a kernel bug. It's a philosophy for system robustness that the kernel has and other operating systems tend to adopt as well. As you get higher up the stack into 3rd party libraries and other programming tools the maintainers often take a more cavalier approach to maintaining compatibility.
That sort of mentality seems like it would push designers in the direction of poor design decisions. If a bitflag is the best design for a new feature, but they're prevented from using it out of a sense of "Let's not ever break anything ever," then the result may be a bad design that people are stuck with for the next 50+ years, which seems objectively worse.
But my reaction is based on theory and not backed by experience, so it's probably unfounded.