Deprecations: Any reason left for warning stage?

[Kenji Hara via Digitalmars-d]

2014-09-27 1:15 GMT+09:00 David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com>:

> As Walter mentioned in a recent pull request discussion [1], the first
> formal deprecation protocol we came up with for language changes looked
> something like this:
>
> 1. remove from documentation
> 2. warning
> 3. deprecation
> 4. error
>
> (The "remove from documentation" step is a bit questionable, but that's
> not my point here.)
>
> However, in the meantime deprecations were changed to be informational by
> default. You now need to explicitly need to pass -de to turn them into
> errors that halt compilation. Thus, I think we should simply get rid of the
> warning step, just like we (de facto) eliminated the "scheduled for
> deprecation" stage from the Phobos process.
>
> Thoughts?
>

I agree that the current warning stage for the deprecated features is
useless.

Kenji Hara
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20140930/60e91f3a/attachment-0001.html>