Re: compile: asm and core options
Tuncer Ayaz <[email protected]> Fri, 13 Dec 2013 15:26:57 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.erlang.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOvwQ4iM97O7Xz5MwaTpM_j3dBL=LJDpS_MZTwa_1jhMGThLqQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On 12/13/13, Björn Gustavsson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Tuncer Ayaz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > I and Björn-Egil discussed the options. We see no reason to have two >> > names for the same option. So we suggest: >> >> I agree. >> >> > Remove the documentation for 'asm' and 'core', but retain the >> > implementation for 'asm' and 'core'. >> >> So, you're suggesting to >> * _only_ document 'from_asm' and 'from_core' and un-document 'asm' >> * implement 'core' -> 'from_core' mapping >> >> Is that correct? >> >> Wouldn't it make more sense to _not_ implement 'core' and deprecate >> 'asm'? >> > > Yes, it does. Make it so. :-) Thanks, it's great you accept that change! The original patch didn't do that because I expected you to find it too invasive :). > By deprecating, do you mean printing a message when the 'asm' option > is used and internally translate it to 'to_asm'? I still think that > 'asm' should be undocumented. Yes, it should warn about a removal in R18. Also, of course 'asm' should be un-documented; I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in the previous email. Updated the branch accordingly, please re-fetch. _______________________________________________ erlang-patches mailing list [email protected] http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches