bug-gnulib
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module


From: Jim Meyering
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] New getprogname module
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 21:47:31 -0700

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Pino Toscano <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Saturday, 3 September 2016 20:47:15 CEST Jim Meyering wrote:
> ...
>> Another thing: should some deprecation warning/note be added regarding
>> the progname module?
>
> I like the idea of adding a deprecation warning.
> If it could be completely replaced, I'd suggest to add the "Status:
> deprecated" attribute to its modules file, but we don't have a
> replacement for set_program_name, so there may still be legitimate
> uses. If a future change were to move set_program_name into its own
> new module, *then*, we could officially deprecate the progname module.
>
>> Is NEWS the proper place for them? Attached there
>> is a small documentation addendum.
>
> Good idea.
> While this is not officially an incompatible change, converting is
> invasive enough that this NEWS blurb belongs in that section.
>
> I've split a long sentence and merged that into your first commit.
> And pushed.
>
>>> I'm prepared to push the attached, but will wait for your ack.
>
> If you're interested, one more thing that may help avoid trouble would
> be to add a syntax-check rule to prohibit new uses of this module,
> including new inclusion of progname.h, new declarations of
> program_name or anything else you can think of that should no longer
> be done here in gnulib.

FYI, while adapting grep to use this module, I encountered a single
new error/warning. The attached patch fixes that:

Attachment: getprogname_h-attribute-pure.diff
Description: Text document


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]