The builtin array.sort and array.reverse have often been mentioned as
"will be deprecated", for several years now.
Bug 1339 "Invariant/const-ness is broken by built-in array properties
sort and reverse" has just been fixed.
It seems silly to have people fix such code, only to have it broken
again when those properties are deprecated.

We should also think about deprecating typedef as well. Unless there's
a _really_ good reason for delaying it a bit longer, we should do it
now.
The longer we leave it, the worse it gets.

Additionally, once GDC gets officially included in gcc, deprecating stuff will be much harder.

Good points. I'm for ripping the band-aid right off.

Related - we should come with a plan with milestones and a deadline for gcc integration. Iain, are you on this list?


Andrei

On 10/9/11 1:38 PM, Don Clugston wrote:
> The builtin array.sort and array.reverse have often been mentioned as
> "will be deprecated", for several years now.
> Bug 1339 "Invariant/const-ness is broken by built-in array properties
> sort and reverse" has just been fixed.
> It seems silly to have people fix such code, only to have it broken
> again when those properties are deprecated.
>
> We should also think about deprecating typedef as well. Unless there's
> a _really_ good reason for delaying it a bit longer, we should do it
> now.
> The longer we leave it, the worse it gets.
>
> Additionally, once GDC gets officially included in gcc, deprecating
> stuff will be much harder.
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-internals mailing list
> dmd-internals at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals

Yes, I agree this should be done ASAP.

Has anyone also looked at what it would take to remove the xtoString and friends from TypeInfo_Struct?? That pseudo interface is getting less and less important with all the improvements in generic programming D has.

It seems to be a common issue when someone thinks they define those members correctly only to find the runtime doesn't use it...


-Steve




>________________________________
>From: Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei at erdani.com>
>To: Discuss the internals of DMD <dmd-internals at puremagic.com>
>Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2011 10:30 PM
>Subject: Re: [dmd-internals] I think we should deprecate array .sort and .reverse properties in this release
>
>Good points. I'm for ripping the band-aid right off.
>
>Related - we should come with a plan with milestones and a deadline for gcc integration. Iain, are you on this list?
>
>
>Andrei
>
>On 10/9/11 1:38 PM, Don Clugston wrote:
>> The builtin array.sort and array.reverse have often been mentioned as
>> "will be deprecated", for several years now.
>> Bug 1339 "Invariant/const-ness is broken by built-in array properties
>> sort and reverse" has just been fixed.
>> It seems silly to have people fix such code, only to have it broken
>> again when those properties are deprecated.
>>
>> We should also think about deprecating typedef as well. Unless there's
>> a _really_ good reason for delaying it a bit longer, we should do it
>> now.
>> The longer we leave it, the worse it gets.
>>
>> Additionally, once GDC gets officially included in gcc, deprecating
>> stuff will be much harder.
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmd-internals mailing list
>> dmd-internals at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
>_______________________________________________
>dmd-internals mailing list
>dmd-internals at puremagic.com
>http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/dmd-internals/attachments/20111012/1dadc0e9/attachment.html>