Re: Several questions.

[Marius Vollmer]

Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:

> But the problem is, that there might be code that uses the value of
> *top-level-lookup-closure*.  This is AFAIK the only reason that the
> identifier is kept up to date.

Yes, right, I thought of this also.  Does anybody know of code that
uses *top-level-lookup-closure* directly?

We need a way to detect from the Scheme level that deprecated features
should be removed.

What about introducing three levels of handling deprecated things:

  silent: support all deprecated features and don't warn about their use.

  warn: support all deprecated features but warn when they are used.

  error: do not support deprecated features.

Because C code is involved in this, the "error" level needs to be
activated at compile time, while "silent" and "warn" could be selected
at run time.