From maintainers-request at octave dot org Fri Jan 20 10:27:17 2006
Subject: Re: Depreciated Functions
From: "John W. Eaton" <jwe at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu>
To: Bill Denney <denney at seas dot upenn dot edu>
Cc: Geordie McBain <geordie dot mcbain at aeromech dot usyd dot edu dot au>,         maintainers@octave.org
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:26:33 -0500

On 20-Jan-2006, Geordie McBain wrote:

| Yes, but spell it `deprecated'.
| 
| On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 22:28 -0500, Bill Denney wrote:
| > I'm thinking of adding a warning to all the depreciated functions of the 
| > form
| > 
| > depfxn: depfxn is depreciated, please use newfxn instead.
| > 
| > Where depfxn is the depreciated function name and newfxn is the replacing 
| > function name.  Would that be a fix that people want?


Also, please use the new warning identifier syntax so people can
easily turn off this class of warnings.  For example,

  warning ("octave:deprecated",
           "depfxn: depfxn is deprecated, please use newfxn instead");

There is no need to end the warning with a period.

Since all these warnings will be the same except for the names of the
functions, perhaps we should introduce a new function to shorten this
to

  __warn_deprecated__ ("depfxn", "newfxn");

Thanks,

jwe