Re: DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-16 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:31:38 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP86 Your thoughts? Makes sense to me. The current behavior seems needlessly inconsistent. - Jonathan M Davis

Re: DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-14 Thread deadalnix via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:31:38 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP86 Your thoughts? HAHAHAHAHA consistency, good one :)

Re: DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-14 Thread w0rp via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:54:01 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote: On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:31:38 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP86 Your thoughts? I guess there's no reason not to, so LGTM. The use of the deprecated attribute on variables seems misguided in the

Re: DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-14 Thread Guillaume Piolat via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:31:38 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP86 Your thoughts? OK. Is deprecated on variables used by anyone here?

Re: DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-14 Thread Brian Schott via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 12:33:19 UTC, deadalnix wrote: HAHAHAHAHA consistency, good one :) We can dream.

DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-13 Thread Brian Schott via Digitalmars-d
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP86 Your thoughts?

Re: DIP86: Consistency for the "deprecated" attribute/storage class

2016-01-13 Thread Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d
On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:31:38 UTC, Brian Schott wrote: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP86 Your thoughts? I guess there's no reason not to, so LGTM. The use of the deprecated attribute on variables seems misguided in the first place though. I don't see much use for it vs possible use on