On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 01:22 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 21:23 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 15:18 -0400, David Hampton wrote: > > > > Would it make sense to mark all of the deprecated API in GLib and GTK+ > > > > with G_GNUC_DEPRECATED, so that people who are not using the > > > > DISABLE_DEPRECATED macros still get warned that they are using > > > > deprecated functions? > > Yes, pretty please. > I'm trying to nuke out all uses of deprecated functions, but declaring > all the *_DISABLE_DEPRECATED macros is a bit rough still (I can't test > on all of the combinations of systems the thing is supposed to not error > out)
*_DISABLE_DEPRECATED is a tool for developers / for you; you should never ship like that, because *any* function may be deprecated in a future version and you have no control over that. Add a --configure switch that turns on *_DISABLE_DEPRECATED, configure your on compilations that way, fix all the resulting problems, but there is no benefit to shipping that way... a deprecation that one of your users sees but you don't is a deprecation you can't fix, because you aren't using a new enough version of GTK+ to have the replacement. Owen _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list