How Do Binaries work together? What breaks ABI?

For two (dynamic) libraries to work together they need:

• API compatibility
• ABI compatibility

If you have correct function, parameter names, and are able to access it (it’s not private) then you’re good. The compiler validates if classA is using the correct Programming Interface from classB 👈 API (Application Programming Interface)

Example of API usage

struct House {
    var address = Address(streetAddress: "1100 Happy St.")
}

struct Person {
    var address = Address("1100 Sad St.") // ‼️ Missing argument label 'streetAddress:' in call
}

struct Address {
    let streetAddress: String
}

ABI compatibility is similar to API, but just at the binary level. The compiler is no longer involved. What’s involved is the dynamic linker dyld.

It checks to see if the undefined symbols - symbols that are to be provided by another binary can be found in another dynamically linked library. dyld checks if binaryA is using the correct Binary Interface from binaryB 👈 ABI (Application Binary Interface)

What is the purpose of ABI Stability?

Dynamic linking is our goal, and ABI stability is just a means to that end - How Swift Achieved Dynamic Linking Where Rust Couldn’t - Aria Desire

Example of ABI usage

Library A

import LibB
struct Car {
    let map = Map()
    map.start(accuracy: .high)
}

Library B

public struct Map {
    public func start(accuracy: Accuracy)
}

public enum Accuracy {...} 

Once the two libraries are compiled, then inspecting libA’s symbols using nm (see my other post for more), we’d see undefined symbols. Among the list of outputs we’d see something similar to this:

U _$s4LibB3MapVAA0C0VyAA8AccuracyO4startyAF_tFTq 
U _$s4LibB8AccuracyO4highyA2CmF

U _$s4LibB3MapVAA0C0VyAA8AccuracyO4startyAF_tFTq: Is the mangled name for the Map.start(accuracy:) method in Swift.
U _$s4LibB8AccuracyO4highyA2CmF: Is the mangled name for the Accuracy enum in Swift, also undefined in libA and defined in libB.
The U indicates that it is undefined in libA and must be provided by libB and that things will be resolved by dynamic linking.

Similarly, if we inspected libB, then we’d the same symbols, but as such:

T _$s4LibB3MapVAA0C0VyAA8AccuracyO4startyAF_tFTq 
T _$s4LibB8AccuracyO4highyA2CmF

T indicates that it is a defined function or method. For more on that see here and here

What breaks ABI?

• Removal of existing API: Removing a public function, type or variable.
• Changes of existing API: Renaming a public function, type or variable OR adding an additional parameter to a function.
• Reduction of access control: Making a public function, type of variable internal or private
• Adding to protocol requirements: Adding a new function to the protocol.
• Increasing the size of a parameter even if the symbol is the same: If you added 100 new private variables to a struct then it may end up breaking the ABI. It doesn’t apply to classes because they’re referenced and it’s indirect.
• Using a much newer or older Swift compiler which causes the symbols between the binaries to mismatch. See here
• etc.

Would it still be a breaking change if you add a new parameter but gave it a default value?

Changing func start(accuracy: Accuracy) to LibB.Map.start(accuracy: Accuracy, distance: Int = 10) breaks the ABI. It doesn’t break API though. Let’s explain that:

LibA precompiled:

Assume LibA is pre-compiled. It was only aware of LibB.Map.start(accuracy: Accuracy)’s symbol at the time of its complication, even if you give the function a default value, because the symbols are different, LibA and LibB are incompatible.

LibA needs to get recompiled so its binary is aware of the new symbol. Code change is not needed though. Upon recompilation, LibA learns of the updated symbol. Without recompilation, LibA would be still looking for the old symbol which doesn’t have the distance parameter. The table below shows the lack of impact of default values on symbol table.

💡 The symbol of the 2nd and 3rd column are the same.
💡 Information about the default value doesn’t get carried within the symbol tables.

LibA - source code:

Assume LibA is not pre-compiled. You have access to its source code and are always compiling it when you run/build/archive the app. After you pull in the latest version of LibB, you re-compile (as you always do for every run) LibA with LibB.Map.start(accuracy: Accuracy, distance: Int). Although technically a breaking change, since code change isn’t necessary and you’re always re-compiling then it appears so that it’s not a breaking change.

Wait what? So it’s a breaking change only if libA is precompiled?

It’s always a breaking change when the change adds a new parameter to an existing function. Once this happens the next version change should be a major version bump. Because your dependent libraries only know how to handle the old symbol. Yet the problem manifests itself only when your dependent library is pre-compiled. In the Apple world, pre-compiled binaries come in the form of xcframeworks.

Every tag/commit on you library can be either delivered as source-code or precompiled. As a result you must version your code with the assumption that it could be either. Even if you shipped pre-compiled, there’s nothing holding back another developer giving access to source code for a specific tag.

That being said, I’ve added new parameters to functions with default values without doing major version bumps. Although this was a mistake, everything worked out because the dependent library/app was using the library’s source code directly.

So adding a default value doesn’t do anything?

Default values help with API but not for every instance˚. Not with ABI. As illustrated the above table, default values have no impact on ABI. This is because in most languages, a function is uniquely identified by its name, and its parameters. Both the argument labels, and the types. For more on that see this WWDC Session - Binary Frameworks in Swift

˚: Adding a new parameter is also a breaking change. It just doesn’t manifest in all kinds of code usage:

func foo(_: Int) -> Int { 0 }
func foo2(_: Int, _: String = "") -> Int { 0 }
[1, 2, 3].map(foo)
[1, 2, 3].map(foo2) // Error: Cannot convert value of type 'Int' to expected element type '(Int, String)'

Shout out to Saagar Jha who hinted the above.

How can I not make a breaking change when adding new parameters to my functions?

Assume you had the following

public struct Map {
    public func start(accuracy: Accuracy)
}

Then go to:

public struct Map {
    public func start(accuracy: Accuracy) {
        start(accuracy: Accuracy, distance: 10)
    }

    public func start(accuracy: Accuracy, distance: Int)  { ...}
}

By doing 👆 you haven’t changed your ABI, rather you’ve just made an addition.

Are there any breaking changes that are’t originated from a change in the API/ABI?

Yes. If you change the behavior of something. Examples:

• Performance Change: A function used to take 0.3 seconds but now takes 6 seconds
• Semantic Change: A function that takes a, b as inputs and returns c, but after a change returns d. This is a breaking change.
• Behavioral Change: A function that used to fire notifications and now it doesn’t. Or previously it didn’t fire any notifications to a known channel but now it does.
• Thread Safety: Introducing or removing thread safety in a function can also be a breaking change. For example, making a function that was previously thread-safe no longer thread-safe, or vice versa.
• Resource Management: Changing how resources are managed or cleaned up within a function. For example, if a function that previously did not close file handles now closes them, it can impact the overall resource management in an application. Or if a function previously used 1% battery, but now uses 5%.
• Not a breaking change, but worth mentioning that you can’t compile a binary for the macOS platform but then expect it to work for the Linux platform. The binary has to be for the appropriate platform.

It’s better to mark all the above changes as a major version change along with proper release notes.

How does a binary written in Swift work with a binary written in Rust?

Not every two binaries can work together. The ABI between the two need to understand one another. This is assisted by a ffi. FFIs assist with exposing the interface of one library to the other. Usually the interface is on top of C, since C is a widely used low-level language.

A foreign function interface (FFI) is a mechanism by which a program written in one programming language can call routines or make use of services written or compiled in another one.
It mates the semantics and calling conventions of one programming language (the host language, or the language which defines the FFI), with the semantics and conventions of another (the guest language).

You basically have to spend extra effort and use the ffi to create the interface. This is something that you don’t have to do for two Swift binaries, because it’s all automatic.

Summary

API is about correct mapping of Programming Interface. ABI is about correct mapping of symbols. Symbols are based off of function name, parameter names and parameter types. Default values don’t show up in symbols.

Adding a new parameter with a default value is still a breaking change. There were lots of other ways to break binary compatibility. It’s important to be able to identify these and do major version bumps when needed.

Last but not least, often you’ve made a breaking change but your build process masks it and helps you recover from it. Be sure to still do a major bump.

Acknowledgements

Shout outs to Saagar Jha as well for helping me figure all of these unknown and reviewing this post.