Re: Deprecations

On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 01:22 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 21:23 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 15:18 -0400, David Hampton wrote:
> > > > Would it make sense to mark all of the deprecated API in GLib and GTK+
> > > > with G_GNUC_DEPRECATED, so that people who are not using the
> > > > DISABLE_DEPRECATED macros still get warned that they are using
> > > > deprecated functions?
> Yes, pretty please.
> I'm trying to nuke out all uses of deprecated functions, but declaring
> all the *_DISABLE_DEPRECATED macros is a bit rough still (I can't test
> on all of the combinations of systems the thing is supposed to not error
> out)

*_DISABLE_DEPRECATED is a tool for developers / for you; you should
never ship like that, because *any* function may be deprecated in a
future version and you have no control over that.

Add a --configure switch that turns on *_DISABLE_DEPRECATED, configure
your on compilations that way, fix all the resulting problems, but there
is no benefit to shipping that way... a deprecation that one of your
users sees but you don't is a deprecation you can't fix, because you
aren't using a new enough version of GTK+ to have the replacement.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]