[phobos] Deprecation of std.date

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Could you replace the use of std.date within Phobos with std.datetime?

Andrei

On 1/15/11 10:49 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Saturday 15 January 2011 20:28:33 Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> I've been going through the process of making Phobos use std.datetime
>> instead of std.date. It isn't all that many changes, but it does mean that
>> we're going to need to deprececate several functions outside of std.date
>> and std.dateparse (all in std.file IIRC) and of course the modules
>> std.gregorian, std.date, and std.dateparse. That's fine. The problem,
>> however, is marking them as "scheduled for deprecation" with a pragma
>> rather than just marking them as deprecated. It works just fine to mark
>> them as scheduled for deprecation with a pragma, but it means that the
>> output for the unittest build of Phobos spits out
>>
>> std.date has been scheduled for deprecation. Please use std.datetime
>> instead. std.dateparse has been scheduled for deprecation. Please use
>> std.datetime instead.
>>
>> almost every other line (as opposed to std.gregorian, which prints out its
>> message once or twice). It's definitely annoying, albeit temporary.
>>
>> Is it acceptable to pollute the output for the build that thoroughly, or
>> should I should I just mark the std.date-related stuff as deprecated
>> instead of scheduled to be deprecated, or are we willing to have the build
>> output flooded with "scheduled for deprecation" messages for a release or
>> two?
>
> And from the looks of it, _anyone_ using std.file will end up getting those
> pragma messages, even if they _don't_ use std.date or std.dateparse at all,
> simply because std.file uses them for functions which are going to be deprecated.
> So, it seems to me that it's going to be highly annoying all around to use the
> pragmas instead of just deprecating them. I expect that if the pragmas weren't
> as heavy-handed, it wouldn't be as big an issue, but they seem to print just
> because you used a module that used a module that has such a pragma in it - even
> if you didn't directly or indirectly use any of the functionality which was
> scheduled for deprecation.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos