Hi,
I would like to use "deprecated" on a member function, but do it from a separate file

this works:
///
void func() {}

deprecated {
  void func();
}
////

this doesn't work:
////
class C{
  void func() {}
}

deprecated {
  void C.func();
}
////

I get: Error: semicolon expected, not .

Thanks

On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:55:47 +0000, Dru wrote:
> I would like to use "deprecated" on a member function, but do it from a separate file
> 
> this works:
> ///
> void func() {}
> 
> deprecated {
>    void func();
> }

You're defining two functions, presumably in two different modules and with two different fully qualified names. One function is deprecated but has no body, so you will get a deprecation warning and a linker error if you try using it. One function is not deprecated and has a body, so you'll get no errors if you try using it.

If, on the other hand, you define both the non-deprecated and deprecated functions in the same file, and you try using them, you'll get an error saying that the function call matches multiple functions.

Thanks for the reply
I will try to explain what I mean:

The first example shows that it is possible to deprecate a function separately from it's definition.

The second example tries the same for a member function but it fails with a compile error.


I want to know if it is possible to "fix" the second example?
(deprecate a member function separately from it's definition)

On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:33:14 +0000, Dru wrote:
> The first example shows that it is possible to deprecate a function separately from it's definition.

No, it doesn't. You declared two *different* functions. One was deprecated; the other wasn't.

> I want to know if it is possible to "fix" the second example? (deprecate a member function separately from it's definition)

No. All functions must be deprecated where you declare them.

You're right it did define two functions
same signature and no compile error, heh