2014-03-29 21:29 GMT+01:00 James E Lang <[email protected]>: > Oh dear! So let me get this straight. Old macros might not work with newer > versions of LO. > > I realize that backward compatibility leads to "bloat" when carried to the > extreme but shouldn't the older specification be deprecated but still > supported through two major versions (e.g. version 3.x specification > deprecated through version 5.x) or maybe for two years? And shouldn't there > be a stand alone migration tool? And shouldn't a library of these tools be > available online indefinitely? >
This is complicated, and usually things are done this way. However, at the time this change happened, there where a lot of warnings about it, because it changed the behavior of existing functions. You can't really mark "deprecated" a function and replace it with another function using the same name/interface. And having something like a DateTime2 interface to "supersede" DateTime would only lead to more bloat, the exact thing we don't want when facing this kind of changes. To be fair, this is a relatively rare case, and is well documented. It is still annoying when you hit that in your code, but sometime it can't be avoided. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
