2014-06-26 13:20, Aaron Campbell: > On Jun 26, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at > intel.com> wrote: > >> I agree we should try to use the "deprecated" attribute when possible. > >> So application porting effort will be smoother. > >> > >> But in this case, there is something different: as Stephen wrote, > >> rte_snprintf is useless. It's useless inside the DPDK so it's even more > >> useless for user applications. > >> As it's really useless, it has no sense to keep it as deprecated. > >> Please, let's simply remove it. > > > > The reason to keep it as deprecated is so that those customers who don't > > want to do a huge amount of search-replace immediately can get things > > working again temporarily using -Wno-deprecated. It provides a simple > > temporary fallback cushion, and then we can completely remove the > > function later. So, I'd like to see us remove all our usage of the > > function internally in 1.7, along with marking as deprecated, and then > > completely remove in 1.8, (i.e. in a week's time or so) :-) > > As a DPDK user, I?d vote to kill it now. I doubt it is widely used in any > external applications. Such usage would be mostly from copy/pasting the > sample code, is my guess.
I think everybody understood the idea: we'll try to use deprecation model when possible. In this case, it's probably useless but we close the discussion by deprecating it. We'll remove it soon, don't worry :) -- Thomas
