I would be for your proposal. Knowing that it will be deprecated is not too useful when you don't know where it is used.
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > Okay. From the looks of it, at same point relatively soon, we're going to have > the ability to give deprecated a message, which will improve deprecated > considerably, but we have not agreed on any changes to deprecated which would > support "scheduled for deprecation." We have been using pragmas to add > messages to some of the stuff that's been scheduled for deprecation, but that > only works with templated stuff, and some people have been complaining about > it, particularly since the messages don't (and can't) tell them _where_ in > their code the soon to be deprecated stuff is being used. Given the complaints > and the fact that we can't actually use messages unilaterally with stuff which > has been scheduled for deprecation, at this point, I'm inclined to think that > we'd be better off just removing the pragmas on stuff that's been scheduled > for > deprecation. Is anyone opposed to this? > > If not, then I'd like to make the changes ASAP so that they can make it into > the next release. I don't think that anything else has been scheduled for > deprecation since the last release, but since the messages have been causing > complaints, I'd like to get the situation settled, and if we're not going to > be improving deprecated to deal with "scheduled for deprecation" anytime soon, > then I think that we should just drop the practice of using pragmas for it. > > I'd leave in the pragmas on the stuff which has already been deprecated until > deprecated can take a message, but for the "scheduled for deprecation" stuff, > I > think that we should remove the pragmas, since they appear to be primarily > annoying people. > > So, in the long run, when deprecating stuff, we'd do it like so: > > 1. Mark something as scheduled for deprecated in the documentation and the > changelog. > > 2. Mark it as deprecated and give deprecated an informative message. > > 3. Remove the deprecated symbol. > > There would be no messages until #2. In any case, this is probably a bit long > for a fairly simple question: is anyone opposed to my going and removing all > of the "scheduled for deprecation" pragmas so that they aren't in the next > release, given that pretty much everyone who mentions them doesn't like them? > > - Jonathan M Davis > _______________________________________________ > phobos mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos > -- Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. - George Bernard Shaw _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
