[erlang-questions] Strings - deprecated functions

[Eric des Courtis]

>From my perspective, we want the following things:

   - The libraries to stay simple, small and clean (that means throwing
   away things)
   - Our old code to continue to work without modifications (that means
   having a mechanism for compiling old code targetting new versions of Erlang)
   - To mix old and new Erlang code together

I see no reason why we can't have both. What I am not okay with is:

   - Endlessly growing libraries of functions that are there for legacy
   reasons (wasting space and confusing new developers)
   - Fixing libraries over and over again because something got marked
   deprecated

So how do we get both?

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 8:37 AM, zxq9 <zxq9@REDACTED> wrote:

> On 2017年11月24日 金曜日 08:13:49 Eric des Courtis wrote:
> > While I feel the pain of Joe having suffered countless hours fixing
> > deprecation in various old libraries. I have to say there is something to
> > be said for throwing things away.
> >
> > I can't help but think I can have my cake and eat it too. Maybe something
> > like a transpiler to compile old Erlang to new Erland and keep the Erlang
> > VM lean?
>
> If the new functions did what the old functions do, then sure.
>
> But that's not how thing have turned out.
>
> On reflection, I actually think the new string functions should have
> been rolled into a "utf8" module. Or something. And the "strings" module
> could either have had implementation adjustments that use the utf8
> utilities underneath or been left alone to deal with latin1 (but either
> way be amply documented).
>
> I'm the heaviest unicode string dealing guy I know. I'm SUPER happy that
> the idea of "string" has been advanced (finally!) to mean "unicode
> strings".
> But breakage is a thing, and Lloyd and Joe have a point.
>
> -Craig
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20171124/c424b4a6/attachment.htm>