Let's talk about deprecations

[bachmeier via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 3 July 2017 at 13:14:02 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> So, in general, I think that it's a big mistake to keep 
> deprecated stuff along on a permanent or semi-permanent basis. 
> Keeping it around for about two years like we do now is already 
> quite a long time in that regard. As long as the symbol doesn't 
> require any maintenance, then it's not a big deal, but too 
> often, _some_ maintenance does end up being required.


For Phobos, changing the name would be less about keeping the 
function around for a long time than about offering an easy fix 
once the code does break. The current approach to deprecations is 
that you get a warning that at some point the function might be 
removed, then you update the compiler and you have broken code 
without an obvious fix. A broken build gets your attention, but 
you have a short-term fix. The total length of the deprecation 
cycle wouldn't have to change.