On 2011-07-12 16:52:10 -0400, Leandro Lucarella <l...@llucax.com.ar> said:
This is what deprecated is for! Removing stuff breaks code, not deprecating stuff! Deprecated really is "scheduled for removal", so "scheduled for deprecation" is "scheduled for scheduled for removal", it makes no sense. Fix the compiler!
Actually it sometime makes sense that you'd schedule something to be later scheduled for removal. If there is no replacement for a certain feature, making it deprecated is just a nuisance since the compiler will complain about the problem but you have no alternative yet.
Now, I think the argument for scheduling things for deprecation is just an extreme of that: deprecating things is a nuisance because it breaks code, so we'll schedule them to be deprecated later. But then we add a warning for those things scheduled for deprecation because we don't want people to use them, and "scheduled for deprecation" has just become a synonym for "deprecated but not yet breaking your code". Fixing deprecated to not break code by default is a better option, I think.
-- Michel Fortin michel.for...@michelf.com http://michelf.com/
