Tim Peters <tim.one@comcast.net> writes: > + Is or isn't it deprecated? If it is deprecated, does that mean > something stronger than "should not use it, but may"? Does the > answer vary according to whether it's used in the core or in an > extension? The third part is easy to answer. If it is deprecated, and used in the core or an extension, that use must be removed. Neal is really good at removing deprecated usage :-) On the second question, I'd suggest: is implemented as a function that produces a warning. > The only non-interesting question (to me) is whether each is "really a > function" or "really a macro" -- that's an implementation detail, and C code > following the rules shouldn't care. That will be interesting to extension authors. If they are think they can get performance from using a macro, they will use the macro. If C code shouldn't care, we needed only half of them. Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4