On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 14:10:02 Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 10/22/2014 1:28 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I can understand that, but it does seem a bit risky in this
> case. The
> suggestion of creating a warning for it seems like a good
> one, since it
> allows you to debug like that but needles you to not leave it
> that way.
I don't want deliberately written debug code to produce
needling warnings.
The Boy Who Cried Wolf comes to mind. The feature provides for
a valid use
case, one that is pretty hard to do any other way.
Such warnings should go into a separate linting tool.
That's actually one of the few cases where I would have said that
actually having a warning made sense as opposed to making it an
error or leaving it to a lint tool. Since no one should be
leaving warnings in their code, it seems to me that having a
warning for something that's temporarily okay to do but not okay
to leave in your code is just about the only valid use case for
warnings (particularly if deprecation-related stuff is separate
like it is in D). So, I'd definitely be in favor of having a
warning in this case, but I don't care enough to fight for it
either, particularly since I almost never use debug blocks
(though their ability to bypass pure will probably make it so
that I use them at least periodically).
- Jonathan M Davis
