Ghosting a language feature

[DlangUser38]

On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 01:09:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> "Ghosting" is a current age term for the notion of ceasing all 
> contact with someone.
>
> I propose we define and use "ghosting" for language and library 
> features. It would be a distinct term from "deprecation".
>
> Ghosting would go like this:
>
> * We develop a good definition for the term.
>
> * We add a glossary entry with the definition to the website.
>
> * Once a feature is ghosted, the following happens:
>
> - All documentation and examples of the feature get moved to a 
> distinct portion of the website. It would feature its own URL 
> base (maybe its own domain or subdomain), a distinct, somewhat 
> unpleasant styling, and would use as heading a non-equivocal 
> warning that the feature has been ghosted and other feature(s) 
> should be used instead.
>
> - The links to the ghosted feature from normal code will be 
> minimal and marginalized (gray text, small font, etc) and 
> accompanied by a "ghosted!" warning. We could brand this with 
> some special font, a ghost icon, etc so people are constantly 
> queued they are exploring a part of the language not intended 
> for new code.
>
> - All bugs related to the feature will be closed as "resolved 
> wontfix".
>
> - The feature will keep on working as is, but new compiler and 
> library code will not use it.

"Ghosting", "Laugh test", that's really sad. Are you under the 
influence of toxic people since recently ?