|
From: Nicholas N. <n.n...@gm...> - 2009-08-24 22:35:26
|
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Greg Parker<gp...@ap...> wrote: >> Overall I'm in favour of the changes you suggest (making less use of >> VG_(printf)). But I'd prefer not to rename it to >> VG_(something_so_totally_obscure_youd_never_think_to_use_it). How about >> VG_(dprintf), the d to emphasise it's debuggingness? I think dprintfs are >> a fairly widely understood thing. > > If it's intended for development use only, it could be marked > __attribute__((deprecated)), which would in turn cause a build warning > everywhere it's called. When approaching a release, make sure there aren't > any of those warnings left. That won't work, there will be a number of legitimate uses for it, eg. usage messages. Nick |