Wire library backwards compatibility

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What change would like to see?

Add backwards compatibility (inline) functions to the Wire library.

Why?

This is one of the barriers causing many people to cling to version 0022 or 
0023 and avoid switching to 1.0.  Lots of existing sketches use the Wire 
library and have lots of "send" and "receive" usage.

Would this cause any incompatibilities with previous versions?  If so, how
can these be mitigated?

There no compatilibity issue.

One possible concern might be encouraging the continued use of the old 
functions.  To address that issue, this patch removes them from keywords.txt 
(they were never removed as keywords in 1.0).

When writing new code, the lack of syntax highlighting for the old name will 
gently push people to use the new ones.  But having inline functions will allow 
"legacy" sketches, which are very common, to work properly.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by paul.sto...@gmail.com on 11 Mar 2012 at 6:59

Attachments:

• Wire_backwards_compatibility.diff

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I'm not quite convinced this is a good idea, but if we're going to do it, we 
should do it for 1.0.1.  Will consider.

Original comment by dmel...@gmail.com on 11 Mar 2012 at 5:00

• Added labels: Component-Wire, Milestone-1.0.1

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I'm very convinced this is a very good idea.

I have been in software development for decades now and one of the reasons 
Microsoft windows is still number one is its downwards compatibility.
When you are small and there is little content around there is little reason to 
think about backwards compatibility. Once you have a serious footprint, not 
handling backwards compatibility will shoot you in your foot.
I feel that rumble that has been going on till today on the Arduino forum on 
this subject, is proof enough this matter should be handled with proper care.

I agree that a piece of hardware that on its own doesn't do anything can not be 
compared to a operating system like Microsoft windows,   but.
Arduino positions itself as a environment for artist and students. For both of 
them incompatibility issues are very confusing. Some of them will drop off when 
being confronted with incompatibilities.
Jantje

Original comment by jan.Baey...@gmail.com on 24 Apr 2012 at 11:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi, Firstly thanks to consider adding this compatibility. 

As many people pointed in forums, not everybody that uses arduino is capable of 
updating the code in order to get old libraries working. Also the comunity 
might be big in certain projects but not in others, and help can be hard to 
find when you struggle in very basic stuff. 

I wish I could know more in order to not have this issues but as a plattform 
for students and DIY enthusiasts this incompatibilites issues with old projects 
can really mess things up.

looking forward to get things rolling! All the best.
Julian 

Original comment by basin...@gmail.com on 28 Apr 2012 at 9:46

[GoogleCodeExporter]

At this point, I'm not sure it makes sense to add this backwards compatibility. 
 I think a lot of people have been transitioning to 1.0 and I'd like to 
continue that.  

Original comment by dmel...@gmail.com on 21 May 2012 at 5:40

• Changed state: WontFix

[GoogleCodeExporter]

it's a shame that we still are using those old versions, 1.0 should be standard 
from now on.

Original comment by andre.kj...@gmail.com on 21 May 2012 at 9:23