I also agree with Chet. People shouldn't expect features that have never been documented to be a stable API. One should regard such a feature as an experimental one (which may be officially announced in the future or may be removed before becoming an official feature).
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 03:51:49AM +1000, Martin D Kealey wrote: > > "It was never documented" is a pretty weak argument when significant parts > > of the shell's seemingly intended behaviour are STILL undocumented. So > > users will *of course* regard the detectable behaviours of the source code > > as the authoritative language definition, whether or not they describe it > > in those terms. ``Undocumented features'' and ``corner-case behaviors happening in combination with several document features'' are different. 2025年8月31日(日) 2:00 Connor Wilkins <connor.wilk...@outlook.com>: > Following this logic, it seems what Stan is saying is that this feature has > been deprecated _since its release_ simply because it was never documented. > It seems Chet is saying something similar here: > > >> In theory, since it's never been documented, I could flip the define in > >> config-top.h and disable it by default. > > I personally think that's an absurd notion. Features deprecated on release? I don't think they are "features deprecated on release". The features that have never been documented should be regarded as experimental features. Where is the notion "features deprecated on release" introduced? -- Koichi
