On 19 November 2003 20:34, Steph wrote: > > Not to branch the discussion, but again: if we never plan on > > removing functions, why go to the trouble of deprecating them? > > Deprecation implies it will be removed. > > > > .. and as Andi said earlier, removal without loud and clear warning > will break thousands of scripts out there. Making users do something > special if they want to use their old code, is a much kinder option. > It might also kick people into updating those scripts before the > deprecated functions actually die.
IMHO, progress from deprecated to removal should go through phases of increasing warning severity: (1) the proposed E_STRICT (or E_DEPRECATED) which will emit a "silent" warning. (2) a noisy warning -- at, say, E_WARNING level, which should catch most test servers but still be maskable on production boxes. (This could even have its own new warning level of, say, E_UNSUPPORTED.) (3) removal of the feature with an E_ERROR message. My 2-pennorth would be that (1) and (3) should only happen at an X.0.0 release, with (2) ocurring somewhere suitable in between. Cheers! Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Ford, Electronic Information Services Adviser, Learning Support Services, Learning & Information Services, JG125, James Graham Building, Leeds Metropolitan University, Beckett Park, LEEDS, LS6 3QS, United Kingdom Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: +44 113 283 2600 extn 4730 Fax: +44 113 283 3211 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
