[Development] On deprecating functions
thiago.macieira at intel.com
Tue Mar 5 00:18:16 CET 2019
On Monday, 4 March 2019 13:27:42 PST André Pönitz wrote:
> Truly personally, I'd even go for
> "no deprecation at all *for purely cosmetical reasons*" as I've seen
> too many taking route
That's a good point. Often we deprecate things because we had a misspelling or
failed to take our own naming convention into account. So maybe what we need
is a two-level warning system: one for bad things that you really should be
doing differently and one for cosmetic things.
Definition of cosmetic: a typedef or a function that will be inline in 6.0.
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel System Software Products
More information about the Development