Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Jul 5, 2007, Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The work here is not changing the bits. the work here is the actual > > auditing of each place to see if it was the correct place. > > Then I guess the best option is to leave no_new_pseudos defined as a > macro, such that we can introduce the enumeration and migrate to it in > a way that makes it clear what has been migrated and what hasn't.
I think the best option is for somebody to go through the uses of no_new_pseudos and fix them. Incomplete transitions are bad. > We might want to take GDB's practice of adding DEPRECATED_ to > deprecated constructs, such that people who stumble across the code > are more likely to notice that it needs auditing and updating. Please, no. That way lies madness. Ian
