Re: Obsoleting end-user-functions

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

Stefan Monnier writes:
 > >> [C]urrently we don't have any good way to obsolete end-user-functions,
 > >> since the obsolescence-info is only used by the byte-compiler
 > > Two easy, non-invasive ideas:
 > > (1) Have help functions such as describe-function present the o-info
 > >     (and maybe apropos could have a very abbreviated notation)
 > 
 > Done since Emacs-22.  But in my experience most users won't use C-h f on
 > a function they already use in their .emacs: that code will just sit
 > there to rot until it breaks.

So break it and be done with it.  They can keep using the old Emacs if
they're so attached to their obsolete functions.

 > > (2) Provide a help-obsolete (maybe apropos-obsolete is a better name?)
 > >     function which lists all symbols with o-info in apropos
 > >     style.

 > Even less likely to be used.

Not if you adopt a process of deprecating functions, obsoleting them,
and removing them (with the second and third at reasonable minimum
intervals, say one year).

You have to balance user inconvenience against effective development
practice.

 > PS: The problem with auto-byte-compiling is that I don't want to waste
 > my time arguing about the old issue of "prefer an old .elc to a new .el".

So don't.  Just remove the interpreter. ;-)