http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9289
Kenji Hara <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|pull | Severity|regression |major --- Comment #10 from Kenji Hara <[email protected]> 2013-01-28 20:04:48 PST --- (In reply to comment #9) > I don't see why language features should be treated differently. The only > problem I see right now is deprecated features are not being warn when gagging > (I think that's the term for when errors are silent to evaluate something at > compile time that is OK to fail, like tratis(compile) or static if's). I think > usage of deprecated features there should trigger a warning too. If the idea > behind some of this construct is just to test if an old feature is still > working, maybe that should be fixed and "calculated" through the compiler's > version or something like that. > > If we keep deprecated language features as errors by default, we will end up > with the exact same problem we had before making deprecations as warnings the > default. Why would we want to do that? OK. I was convinced that it is the right thing to some extent. To make things keep simple, deprecations between language feature and user-defined symbols should be treated by a same way. I withdraw this regression, by lowering priority to "major". > The only problem I see right now is deprecated features are not being warn > when gagging I'd try to implement it in experiment. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
