A few general thoughts

Francisco Almeida francisco.m.almeida at gmail.com
Fri Apr 29 04:11:24 PDT 2011


On 29-04-2011 12:37, Daniel Gibson wrote:
> Am 29.04.2011 12:11, schrieb lenochware:
>>> This has been acknowledged. Yes, removing delete in D2 will break
>>> compatibility with existing code. However, I'm sure that at an early
>>> stage, the compiler will probably issue error messages once it
>>> encounters delete statements, for which the fix is quite easy: just
>>> remove them, and recompile. As an unfortunate side effect, a few other
>>> problems might occur, especially for shared objects. But refactoring to
>>> a simpler system, in which the garbage collector is trusted to manage
>>> the heap, should be easy.
>>
>> Yes, I was speaking generally here about "breaking compatibility"
>> philosophy.
>> I agree that delete probably will not be such problem - but I would
>> prefer mark
>> features deprecated
>> before it will be really removed and write only warning when compiled
>> - in case it
>> is possible. (For example some datatype was removed in d2 (bit? - I am
>> not sure)
>> which is one of error messages which I get when I try compile my
>> project with
>> incompatible library) People don't have to know what is planned for
>> removing.
>> Moreover there is not complete list of changes in d2. Or is?
>
> Who said that delete will not be marked deprecated before it's removed?

I apologize, I meant "warning" instead of "error". Deprecation warnings, 
obviously.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list