As Walter mentioned in a recent pull request discussion [1], the
first formal deprecation protocol we came up with for language
changes looked something like this:
1. remove from documentation
2. warning
3. deprecation
4. error
(The "remove from documentation" step is a bit questionable, but
that's not my point here.)
However, in the meantime deprecations were changed to be
informational by default. You now need to explicitly need to pass
-de to turn them into errors that halt compilation. Thus, I think
we should simply get rid of the warning step, just like we (de
facto) eliminated the "scheduled for deprecation" stage from the
Phobos process.
Thoughts?
Best,
David
[1]
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/4021#issuecomment-56758916
