On 9/26/14 12:15 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
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?
Case against:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2254#issuecomment-52764718
-Steve
