It just occurred to me that components will look better with the deprecating warning annotation and without unused parameters.
The warning is definitely a good thing. Denis Jan 4, 2013 v 6:50 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[email protected]>: > An annotation could be written, yes. It would just produce the code I've > been manually writing. > > I don't want to remove deprecated parameters because of some concern for > backwards compatibility; if we just remove the parameters, they become > informal parameters (or are just dropped), and change the behavior of > components with no warning or feedback at all. Instead, I'm trying to > enforce one release minimum of warning before stripping them out entirely. > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:04 AM, Denis Stepanov > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Looking into 5.4 code with deprecated component parameters using the >> DeprecationWarning service and I have a few suggestions: >> >> Could it be implemented by introducing a new annotation >> @IgnoreDeprecatedParametersWarning({"visible", "update"}) on the component >> class or using the @DeprecatedParameter on a class field? Also, why not >> just remove deprecated parameters, are they needed for the >> DeprecationWarning service to detect the binding? >> >> Denis >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > Creator of Apache Tapestry > > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to > learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! > > (971) 678-5210 > http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
