develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from July 2016

Re: Indented here docs?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
demerphq
Date:
July 23, 2016 14:23
Subject:
Re: Indented here docs?
Message ID:
CANgJU+X4GK+c7sUQTf+OLC=kyyrfZg2E6fJqeNivMEP0EssnWA@mail.gmail.com
On 22 Jul 2016 13:02, "Aristotle Pagaltzis" <pagaltzis@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> * Sawyer X <xsawyerx@gmail.com> [2016-07-22 17:24]:
> > That's completely missing the point. It isn't "discouraged", it's
> > "deprecated" with intent to remove. When we're discussing now whether
> > and how to remove it, you suggest just backtracking completely on it,
> > marking it as "discouraged".
>
> What do you think “discouraged” means? It means we may never remove the
> thing, but there is a chance that we will deprecate and then remove it.
>
> What is the status of an ancient deprecation? After review we may decide
> to scale it back to discouraged, meaning may never remove the thing, but
> there is a chance we will upgrade it to a deprecation with teeth now, or
> re-deprecate it later, and then remove the thing.
>
> What exactly is the difference in status?
>
> > I disagree with the idea of "Let's just move it to discouraged and
> > review again".
>
> If you make reviewing every deprecation a prerequisite to clarifying
> its status then Yves will be waiting a long time for “deprecated” to
> become meaningful.

We can make deprecated mean something simply by making every deprecation
warning we have become a  fatal exception.

Yvex

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About