Re: Terminology question: Deprecated function

Subject: Re: Terminology question: Deprecated function
From: Meg Halter <aiki4us -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 12:35:34 -0700 (PDT)

Seems to me that term has been around a long time and, as far as
I know, it's not slang. I remember seeing it in Fortran
standards at least in the early 90's, perhaps earlier. The
standard English meaning "to express mild or regretful
disapproval" nicely reinforces the software meaning. Go ahead
and use it.

-- Meg

Geoff Stern asks about "deprecated function"

>None of us -- engineers or writers -- likes this term, although
it seems to be widespread usage in API documentation.

>Any suggestions for an alternative that's fairly laconic?

Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.

Announcing new options for IPCC 01, October 24-27 in Santa Fe.
Attend the entire event, select a single day, or sign up for
a Saturday postconference workshop.

Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: German dates?
Next by Author: Re: *.dat file
Previous by Thread: RE: Terminology question: Deprecated function
Next by Thread: RE: Terminology question: Deprecated function

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads