Conversation
These functions have existed in the API since the dawn of time. It is about time we describe how they work, even if we discourage users from using them.
|
|
||
| See this table for notable exceptions. | ||
| .RS | ||
| We discourage users from using any of these functions in new applications. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think deprecated might be a better term as it is more common among various APIs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
deprecated implies it's going to be removed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Leads to the same goal though
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm avoiding the use of word deprecated since it might give the impression that the function is going away in a foreseeable time. Some years ago I think we even anticipated that future, but these days I think we're more of the mindset that we will never remove any functions from the API (for all practical senses of the word, like decades).
I still want to discourage users from using the *mprintf() functions since they're not as complete and standards compliant like most modern *printf() implementations and it saves both users and us from problems if they rather lean on those than on our implementations.
3 participants
These functions have existed in the API since the dawn of time. It is
about time we describe how they work, even if we discourage users from
using them.