On 12/3/2012 10:13 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, December 03, 2012 09:25:08 Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/3/2012 8:41 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Regardless, there's some stuff that's already been deprecated which
probably should be outright removed at some point here (e.g. the
deprecated functions in std.string which don't follow the correct naming
conventions),
I do not see a compelling reason to remove them. Just leave them deprecated.
They're clutter, and they've been deprecated for a while, which means that no
one has been able to use them without -d for a while. It's also trivial to fix
code which uses them, because they're primarily naming changes. It's just not
worth keeping that kind of clutter around in the library IMHO. And the
documentation has made it clear that they were going to be removed.
This is really the crux of our disagreement. I do not see a problem with
leaving "clutter" around if it prevents breaking existing code. It being
trivial to fix user code is not good enough - the fact that the user has
to go back and fix stable, working, debugged code is the problem that
Chris is saying is preventing him from using D seriously.
Remove them from the documentation, ok, but leave them there. It does
not hurt to do so. Let them die on their own, we do not need to push
them out the airlock.
