Being an old intent does not change anything... In Blink anyway, the standard process is to give at least heads up for at least a single release with a deprecation warning, unless the user is effectively zero (say, 0.0001 and lower). In your case, the usage is non-zero (0.0015), which means you will almost surely cause exceptions to be thrown, possibly breaking some websites and wreaking havoc without a prior notice.
Is it far too complicated to emit a deprecation warning and delay the removal by a single release? If adding a deprecation warning is a somewhat trivial change, you might even be able to merge it to Chrome 51 (the current beta) and remove completely in Chrome 52 (as planned). Not ideal, but a good start. ☆*PhistucK* On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Daniel Ehrenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Unfortunately there were no deprecation warnings emitted. However, this > Intent was sent out months ago. > > Dan > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 1:28 AM, PhistucK <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Did you emit deprecation warnings for the usage, or did you just UseCount >> them and now plan to break those 0.0015% without prior notice...? >> >> >> ☆*PhistucK* >> >> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Ehrenberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I ended up adding UseCounters and waiting for results to come in. >>> Finally, they did: none of these three methods were used very much, the >>> most frequent (Promise.defer()) occurring in .0015% of document loads. >>> Therefore, I have unshipped them in V8 in >>> https://codereview.chromium.org/1965183002 , which should make it to >>> Canary soon. Please let me know if there is further evidence of breakage, >>> and this can be reconsidered. >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Daniel Ehrenberg <[email protected] >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> I think it'll be enough to let this be in Canary at first and see what >>>> bug reports come in. I know there are some usages, but I think >>>> developers will have an easy time converting their code to use 'then' >>>> instead of 'chain'. They have to do so anyway if they want their >>>> websites to work in browsers other than Chrome. It would be a simple >>>> find and replace, or a few lines added to the top of the file to >>>> establish the aliases. The semantics are slightly different, but these >>>> differences should only come up in rare edge cases. >>>> >>>> Dan >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:02 AM, PhistucK <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > I agree that this is a good change, of course, but you really should >>>> find >>>> > out whether this breaks a lot of website first (the fact the >>>> developers do >>>> > not mention this does not mean they are not using it)... >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > ☆PhistucK >>>> > >>>> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Daniel Ehrenberg < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> > wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> We don't have any use counters, but the names were rather obscure, >>>> and >>>> >> the ES2015 Promise conventions seem to have stuck more. I have not >>>> >> heard from any users which were in support of the old Promise API, >>>> but >>>> >> on the other hand, the fact that V8 does not currently meet the >>>> ES2015 >>>> >> Promise specification is a frequent complaint from both users and >>>> >> frameworks. There is no way to support both ES2015 Promise semantics >>>> >> per spec and Promise.prototype.chain at the same time. >>>> >> >>>> >> Dan >>>> >> >>>> >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 2:57 PM, PhistucK <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> > Are there any use counters for them? Did you check whether they >>>> are used >>>> >> > in >>>> >> > the wild? >>>> >> > (The HTTP archive can help here, or any internal Google index >>>> searching >>>> >> > you >>>> >> > may have) >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > ☆PhistucK >>>> >> > >>>> >> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 12:50 AM, 'Daniel Ehrenberg' via blink-dev >>>> >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> V8 had added a few functions for manipulating Promises which >>>> didn't >>>> >> >> make it into the ES2015 standard, namely Promise.prototype.chain, >>>> >> >> Promise.accept and Promise.defer. ES2015 specifies Promises in a >>>> way >>>> >> >> which is incompatible with some of these methods, and none of them >>>> >> >> appear to be on track to be included in a standard the future. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> I have added a flag to V8 and Chrome (--js-flags=--promise-extra) >>>> to >>>> >> >> retain the current additional promise features. I intend to flip >>>> the >>>> >> >> flag off by default in general within a few days, with the aim of >>>> V8 >>>> >> >> version 4.9 branching without additional Promise functions. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> Dan >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> -- >>>> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> >> >> Groups >>>> >> >> "blink-dev" group. >>>> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>> send >>>> >> >> an >>>> >> >> email to [email protected]. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
