Deprecated Library Functions / Methods

[Walter Bright]

On 12/3/2012 10:13 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, December 03, 2012 09:25:08 Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 12/3/2012 8:41 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>> Regardless, there's some stuff that's already been deprecated which
>>> probably should be outright removed at some point here (e.g. the
>>> deprecated functions in std.string which don't follow the correct naming
>>> conventions),
>>
>> I do not see a compelling reason to remove them. Just leave them deprecated.
>
> They're clutter, and they've been deprecated for a while, which means that no
> one has been able to use them without -d for a while. It's also trivial to fix
> code which uses them, because they're primarily naming changes. It's just not
> worth keeping that kind of clutter around in the library IMHO. And the
> documentation has made it clear that they were going to be removed.

This is really the crux of our disagreement. I do not see a problem with 
leaving "clutter" around if it prevents breaking existing code. It being 
trivial to fix user code is not good enough - the fact that the user has 
to go back and fix stable, working, debugged code is the problem that 
Chris is saying is preventing him from using D seriously.

Remove them from the documentation, ok, but leave them there. It does 
not hurt to do so. Let them die on their own, we do not need to push 
them out the airlock.