Automatic code rewriting is what might make syntax deprecations
more feasible in 6 month.
Perhaps, but this change is so straightforward that I would
expect that even a
very large codebase could be updated in a very short space of
time.
The main counterargument against this change is that it's yet
another change that require people to rewrite their code.
Also the pull simply deprecates certain code, but for good
acceptance we also need to educate D users why we're doing this
change and must make updating code as painless as possible. A
tool like dfix will become more important with every line of D
code that is written. Too often we're only looking at phobos.
it's for a practice that we've already been discouraging for
some time now
Never heard of it before. If this were common knowledge, as in
every D beginner would stumble over that information, it would
solve half of the problem.
I'd still welcome if someone updated the style guide.
I see is dmd's headergen, because if that's putting const on
the left, then
it'll generate code that will then be warned about, which would
definitely be
bad. The ddoc generation should be fixed to, but that can be
done later,
Obviously we should fix all of our own code and explain people
why they should update theirs before we start deprecating it.
