Re: [RFA take 6] Allow setting breakpoints on inline functions (PR 10738)

[Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>]

Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 03/15/2012 07:51 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > Why don't we just go with "deprecated"?  We completely skip the
> > "obsolete" ones, and skip the "deprecated" ones, unless the user
> > wants them badly.  The explanation why they're deprecated belongs
> > elsewhere - it doesn't have to be part of the option name...
> > 
> > So picking up one of Gary's previous examples, warnings would
> > simply be:
> > 
> >   versions < 4: "Skipping obsolete .gdb-index section in %s"
> >   versions 4,5: "Skipping deprecated .gdb_index section in %s,
> >                  pass --use-deprecated-index-sections to use them anyway"
> 
> More so (cause I know people aren't yet fed up with the bikeshedding
> :-) ), if in the future we ever we want to be selective on _which_
> deprecated versions we want to load, we can extend the option to
> accept a list of integers, like:
> 
>  --use-deprecated-index-sections=7,8
> 
> From <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecation>:
> 
> "In the process of authoring computer software, its standards or
> documentation, or other technical standards, deprecation is a status
> applied to features, characteristics, or practices to indicate that
> they should be avoided, typically because they have been superseded.
> 
> Although deprecated software features remain in the software, their
> use may raise warning messages recommending alternative practices,
> and deprecation may indicate that the feature will be removed in the
> future.  Features are deprecated - rather than immediately removed -
> in order to provide backward compatibility, and give programmers who
> have used the feature time to bring their code into compliance with
> the new standard."
> 
> Sounds Just Perfect to me.  Can this make everyone happy, please?  :-)

I like it.

Cheers,
Gary

-- 
http://gbenson.net/