Proposal on improvement to deprecated

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2011-10-03 09:07, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, October 03, 2011 08:54:24 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> I was thinking that the levels match to different types of compiler
>> messages. Above one level you get a note, above the next level a warning
>> and above yet another level you get an error. Then it's up to the users
>> to decide what a given level means.
>
> I'm sure that someone would find the additional control that your suggestion
> gives useful, but it really sounds overly complicated to me. Deprecation needs
> to work smoothly, but it's also a feature that shouldnt' be needed very often,
> so it's not something that should be particularly complicated. And Walter
> doesn't seem to like the idea of complicating it more than it currently is _at
> all_ beyond adding the ability to give a custom message to deprecated. So, if
> any changes beyond that are going to be made, it looks like they're _really_
> going to need to pull their weight and have a very solid argument for their
> inclusion.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I guess you're right, I just throw out a suggestion.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg