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

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

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been superseded.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?  :-)

-- 
Pedro Alves