Re: Suggest: dont declare interactive-p obsolete

[Artur Malabarba <bruce.connor.am@gmail.com>]

2015-11-19 4:16 GMT+00:00 John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com>:
>>>>>> raman  <raman@google.com> writes:
>
>> This is a minor change -- that will let existing code run without warnings.
>> If we turned the defun in subr.el to a defsubst and dropped the (declare
>> (obsolete called-interactively-p "23.2")) (called-interactively-p
>> 'interactive))
>
> I don't see any downsides to this; others?

I wasn't here when this function was made obsolete, but I can think of
a couple of downsides:

1. Code duplication (sure, the code is already duplicated, but by
keeping it obsolete we can hopefully remove it soon).
2. The name interactive-p makes it sound like it's equivalent to `(not
noninteractive)', which determines whether Emacs itself (not the
function) is running interactively. While `called-interactively-p' is
more obviously about how the function was called.

By my estimates, this function was made obsolete 5 years ago. And it
_is_ obsolete.
IMHO, packages that try to support Emacs releases 6 years apart (as
noble as that is) can't expect to be able to do that without a few
warnings. There are ways for such packages to suppress these warnings.
But it's important to keep them to prevent this function from
spreading.