From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Obsolete functions and variables Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:27:57 +0200 Message-ID: <47FEA27D.1050501@gmail.com> References: <18429.40810.598948.654442@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18430.39543.722541.830806@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207870119 31040 80.91.229.12 (10 Apr 2008 23:28:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:28:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Nick Roberts , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 11 01:29:11 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Jk6CT-0000vx-B9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:29:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jk6Bp-0003ze-MF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:28:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jk6Bm-0003zW-JY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:28:18 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jk6Bk-0003yF-Sk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:28:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jk6Bk-0003y6-Ml for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:28:16 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jk6Bf-0004by-P2; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:28:12 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-150-27.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.150.27]:64339 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1Jk6Bd-0007rm-7N; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:28:09 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080410-1, 2008-04-10), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.150.27 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1Jk6Bd-0007rm-7N. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1Jk6Bd-0007rm-7N 99f074a4900d4165f203b00202c5739d X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:94915 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Nick Roberts wrote: > >> I guess >> the dangers generally outweigh the advantages but there's not much point in >> marking them obsolete if they're never going to be removed. > > I agree. I just don't expect it to happen. I am not sure I agree. Are not a function sometimes marked as obsolete because there is a new better version that works in more cases? The old obsolete function may still work in many cases. Maybe a more visible warning when obsolete things are found would be good? (Using for example lwarn.)