On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Martin Landa <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > 2013/11/1 Glynn Clements <[email protected]>: > >> But I'm not able to decide on which occasion I want which function. > >> Someday, I can try to call both functions with different map/mapset > >> combinations but reading from manual would be more effective. > > > > Please use G_find_raster2() always (similarly for the other G_find_* > > functions). G_find_raster() exists for backward compatibility only. > > Having it modify the map name in-place has been the source of > > countless bugs. > > it would be probably better to replace G_find_raster() by > G_find_raster2() in G7. Any objections? > Current situation is apparently confusing for many of GRASS > programmers. Keeping backward compatibility between G6 (where > G_find_<maptype>2() have been introduced) and G7 is not necessary in > this case I would say. > So, it is very clear. The only problem was the missing documentation. In G6 we introduced new function A2 to replace function A because function A is bad. This should be explicitly stated in G6 function A documentation. Now we have the new major version G7 (which is not supposed to be C API backwards compatible), so we have to finish the change from A to A2 (in G7). And than we can also rename the A2 function to A (and optionally leave there also A2). Is there a (cross-compiler) way we can use GCC depreciated attribute to trigger compiler warring in these cases? __attribute__ ((deprecated)) __attribute__((deprecated("use new_function instead")) Vaclav > [...] > > Martin > > -- > Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa >
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
