Not to branch the discussion, but again: if we never plan on
removing functions, why go to the trouble of deprecating them?
Deprecation implies it will be removed... and as Andi said earlier, removal without loud and clear warning
will break thousands of scripts out there. Making users do something
special if they want to use their old code, is a much kinder option.
It might also kick people into updating those scripts before the
deprecated functions actually die.
IMHO, progress from deprecated to removal should go through phases of increasing warning severity:
(1) the proposed E_STRICT (or E_DEPRECATED) which will emit a "silent" warning.
(2) a noisy warning -- at, say, E_WARNING level, which should catch most test servers but still be maskable on production boxes. (This could even have its own new warning level of, say, E_UNSUPPORTED.)
(3) removal of the feature with an E_ERROR message.
My 2-pennorth would be that (1) and (3) should only happen at an X.0.0 release, with (2) ocurring somewhere suitable in between.
Cheers!
Mike
Mike Ford, Electronic Information Services Adviser,
Learning Support Services, Learning & Information Services,
JG125, James Graham Building, Leeds Metropolitan University,
Beckett Park, LEEDS, LS6 3QS, United Kingdom
Email: m.ford@leedsmet.ac.uk
Tel: +44 113 283 2600 extn 4730 Fax: +44 113 283 3211