On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: >> Yesterday, Neil Toronto wrote: >>> >>> 1. Obviously, Module 2's path should be 'plot'. Right? And its >>> documentation needs a note that it's deprecated. (I'll do that.) >> >> I don't know if it's that important, maybe poll the users list for >> potential code that uses it? If it is, then given that it's a >> complete reimplementation, I think that it's fine to go with some >> `plot/compat' or something like that -- it forces users who have code >> to change files, but my guess is that most people used it just to try >> stuff out in quick scripts, and on the other side you have Doug who is >> deep enough into it that he'll most likely need to change code anyway. > > I don't think we should do that. And certainly not without a release > or two of warning.
I agree with Robby. We've gotten a lot better about backwards compatibility, and I don't think the win here is worth breaking that. -- sam th sa...@ccs.neu.edu _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
