Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> schrieb am Fr., 29. Sep. 2017 um 09:51 Uhr:

> > From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:43:20 -0400
> > Cc: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>, 26624@debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> > Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > Noam Postavsky <npostavs@users.sourceforge.net> schrieb am So., 24.
> > > Sep. 2017 um 17:44 Uhr:
> > >
> > >     Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > >     > * lisp/emacs-lisp/gv.el (buffer-local-value): Remove.
> > >
> > >     Is it possible to just give an obsolete warning first?
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't think it's possible in the sense of `make-obsolete' because
> > > the expander is not a named function.
> > > It would be possible to use `display-warning' within the body of the
> > > setter, but that would only annoy users.
> > > If necessary, we might add additional code to the `setf' macro to
> > > warn about this form in particular during byte compilation.
> >
> > IMO, a compilation warning would be appropriate.
>
> I agree.  Removing some feature without due warning is not something
> we should do, except in very rare cases (which this one isn't).
>

I fully agree, but I don't know how to correctly deprecate a generalized
variable. Should I add code to the byte compiler to deal with this case
explicitly?