On 22/01/2010, at 11:46 AM, Adam Heath wrote: > Scott Gray wrote: >> On 22/01/2010, at 11:32 AM, Adam Heath wrote: >> >>> Scott Gray wrote: >>>> On 22/01/2010, at 11:14 AM, Adam Heath wrote: >>>> >>>>> Scott Gray wrote: >>>>>> A good majority of the deprecated methods prior to the last release were >>>>>> deprecated using the javadoc style: /** @deprecated */ >>>>>> I updated them post release to use the actual @Deprecated annotation, >>>>>> any opinions on whether we're okay to remove them now or would we be >>>>>> better to wait? >>>>> Does javac warn if only javadoc deprecation is used? >>>> After a quick test, the answer is yes. Leaves me wondering what the point >>>> of the annotation is. >>> Don't use a modern compiler that actually understands the annotation. >>> Use an older compiler that only understands the javadoc. >> >> You've lost me, I see two potential ways to understand what you're saying: >> - Do what you're suggesting to properly test if javac warns on javadoc >> deprecations >> Given that prior to annotations being available this was the only way to >> deprecate something then I'm not sure if that would be necessary? >> - Do what you're suggesting to see what the point of the Deprecated >> annotation is. >> I'm not sure how using an older compiler would answer my question? > > The annotation allows you to query it at runtime, instead of it just > being some magical bitflag in the bytecode .class file, that only java > compilers(and other bytecode readers) understand. > > I guess that having @Deprecated allows things to detect at runtime, > thru reflection, whether something is deprecated.
Sounds good to me, thanks.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
