Le 2010-11-17 à 17:47, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
> On 11/17/10 2:42 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
>> But won't that just become a convenient excuse to forget putting the
>> deprecation notice in the documentation? It sounds redundant:
>>
>> /**
>> * Blah blah blah...
>> * Deprecated: use the homonym functions in std.mathspecial.
>> */
>> deprecated("use the homonym functions in std.mathspecial")
>> double lgamma(double);
>
> I thought it's pretty clear that having active deprecation notes is not
> redundant at all. The right solution to avoiding redundancy is to have ddoc
> insert the deprecation note in the generated text.
Ok, so now you have two places where you can write your deprecation notes
instead of one, but only one will make the compiler output a helpful error
message?
What if one day you want to deprecate functions informally (in the
documentation only) and at a later time you want to deprecate them formally
(making the compiler complain), should you coppy all your ddoc-style deprecated
sections to a string following the deprecated keyword?
Is there any advantage in using the deprecated("note") syntax instead of making
the compiler use the existing Deprecated section of ddoc to print a helpful
comment?
--
Michel Fortin
[email protected]
http://michelf.com/
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
