[phobos] Scheduled for deprecation messages

[Daniel Murphy]

Yes please.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Jesse Phillips
<jesse.k.phillips at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would be for your proposal. Knowing that it will be deprecated is
> not too useful when you don't know where it is used.
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:
>> Okay. From the looks of it, at same point relatively soon, we're going to have
>> the ability to give deprecated a message, which will improve deprecated
>> considerably, but we have not agreed on any changes to deprecated which would
>> support "scheduled for deprecation." We have been using pragmas to add
>> messages to some of the stuff that's been scheduled for deprecation, but that
>> only works with templated stuff, and some people have been complaining about
>> it, particularly since the messages don't (and can't) tell them _where_ in
>> their code the soon to be deprecated stuff is being used. Given the complaints
>> and the fact that we can't actually use messages unilaterally with stuff which
>> has been scheduled for deprecation, at this point, I'm inclined to think that
>> we'd be better off just removing the pragmas on stuff that's been scheduled for
>> deprecation. Is anyone opposed to this?
>>
>> If not, then I'd like to make the changes ASAP so that they can make it into
>> the next release. I don't think that anything else has been scheduled for
>> deprecation since the last release, but since the messages have been causing
>> complaints, I'd like to get the situation settled, and if we're not going to
>> be improving deprecated to deal with "scheduled for deprecation" anytime soon,
>> then I think that we should just drop the practice of using pragmas for it.
>>
>> I'd leave in the pragmas on the stuff which has already been deprecated until
>> deprecated can take a message, but for the "scheduled for deprecation" stuff, I
>> think that we should remove the pragmas, since they appear to be primarily
>> annoying people.
>>
>> So, in the long run, when deprecating stuff, we'd do it like so:
>>
>> 1. Mark something as scheduled for deprecated in the documentation and the
>> changelog.
>>
>> 2. Mark it as deprecated and give deprecated an informative message.
>>
>> 3. Remove the deprecated symbol.
>>
>> There would be no messages until #2. In any case, this is probably a bit long
>> for a fairly simple question: is anyone opposed to my going and removing all
>> of the "scheduled for deprecation" pragmas so that they aren't in the next
>> release, given that pretty much everyone who mentions them doesn't like them?
>>
>> - Jonathan M Davis
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.
>   - George Bernard Shaw
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>