www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - deprecated alias

reply kris <foo bar.com> writes:
Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but the 
deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?

Is this intentional?
Feb 16 2007
next sibling parent reply Ary Manzana <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:
kris escribió:
kris escribió:

 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but the 
 deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?
 
 Is this intentional?



 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but the 
 deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?
 
 Is this intentional?


As far as I know, *any* declaration (imports, typedefs, static asserts, 
debug, version, etc.) allow *any* modifier. I don't know if it's 
intentional, but at least that's the way the DMD parser works. I guess 
this makes the parser faster than worrying about this things, but that's 
just a guess.
Feb 16 2007
parent kris <foo bar.com> writes:
Ary Manzana wrote:

 kris escribió:
 kris escribió:
 

 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but 
 the deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?

 Is this intentional?


 
 

 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but 
 the deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?

 Is this intentional?


 
 
 As far as I know, *any* declaration (imports, typedefs, static asserts, 
 debug, version, etc.) allow *any* modifier. I don't know if it's 
 intentional, but at least that's the way the DMD parser works. I guess 
 this makes the parser faster than worrying about this things, but that's 
 just a guess.



Hehe ... just want to know if deprecated is intended to work with alias 
or not? And if so, can we expect a fix for it soon?

:)
Feb 16 2007
prev sibling parent reply "Chris Miller" <chris dprogramming.com> writes:
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:37:40 -0500, kris <foo bar.com> wrote:


 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but the  
 deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?

 Is this intentional?


I did notice deprecated isn't working in all cases, and it seemed to me  
that it's only working when accessing deprecated things in other code. It  
might just be a bug and isn't quite happening this way, but it's what I  
got from it, and I realized it would be a decent way of handling it.
If my code accesses a deprecated thing from within the same file, it's  
quite OK; like private. It's probably just happening to support the  
deprecated feature. e.g. a deprecated function calling another deprecated  
function in the same file shouldn't require -d; it might be just a stub  
with different parameters calling the full implementation, or calling a  
helper function that is also deprecated, in order to continue supporting a  
deprecated feature.
Feb 17 2007
parent reply Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
Chris Miller wrote:


 On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:37:40 -0500, kris <foo bar.com> wrote:
 

 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but the
 deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?

 Is this intentional?


 
 I did notice deprecated isn't working in all cases, and it seemed to me
 that it's only working when accessing deprecated things in other code. It
 might just be a bug and isn't quite happening this way, but it's what I
 got from it, and I realized it would be a decent way of handling it.
 If my code accesses a deprecated thing from within the same file, it's
 quite OK; like private. It's probably just happening to support the
 deprecated feature. e.g. a deprecated function calling another deprecated
 function in the same file shouldn't require -d; it might be just a stub
 with different parameters calling the full implementation, or calling a
 helper function that is also deprecated, in order to continue supporting a
 deprecated feature.


I tried to test this, and the compiler did not pick up the deprecated alias
if used in the client code. An additional factor that may have played a
role in this particular test was that it was a .di file.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
Feb 17 2007
parent Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:


 Chris Miller wrote:
 

 On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:37:40 -0500, kris <foo bar.com> wrote:
 

 Syntactically, the compiler allows "deprecated alias foo bar;"  but the
 deprecated attribute is apparently ignored?

 Is this intentional?


 
 I did notice deprecated isn't working in all cases, and it seemed to me
 that it's only working when accessing deprecated things in other code. It
 might just be a bug and isn't quite happening this way, but it's what I
 got from it, and I realized it would be a decent way of handling it.
 If my code accesses a deprecated thing from within the same file, it's
 quite OK; like private. It's probably just happening to support the
 deprecated feature. e.g. a deprecated function calling another deprecated
 function in the same file shouldn't require -d; it might be just a stub
 with different parameters calling the full implementation, or calling a
 helper function that is also deprecated, in order to continue supporting
 a deprecated feature.


 
 I tried to test this, and the compiler did not pick up the deprecated
 alias if used in the client code. An additional factor that may have
 played a role in this particular test was that it was a .di file.
 


Actually it did, but not the way I expected. If you use the declared symbol,
not the alias, then you will get a deprecation message. Starts to sound
like a bug.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango
Feb 17 2007