RE: [AD] including allegro.h and backward compability

["Vincent Penquerc'h" <Vincent.Penquerch@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: [AD] including allegro.h and backward compability

> You found *the* wrong example, ALLEGRO_NO_MAGIC_MAIN or
> ALLEGRO_USE_CONSOLE
> are right examples :-)

Well, I saw a bunch of these, but in the platform specific
sections, and so I guessed only these were documented, since
ALLEGRO_NO_STD_HEADERS is platform independant.

> How do you want the user to know that a routine is deprecated
> if you don't
> tell him ? Several routines are already explicitly marked as

Two cases:
 - the user is a new user: he won't ever know about what was in
   the API previously, so he doesn't care. No need to add names of
   deprecated syms in the docs for that person.
 - the user updates to a new version: he will go and read api.txt
   to check whether code has to be changed to work fine. Since
   deprecated syms would be listed here, he'd find those. And the
   docs in allegro._tx wouldn't refer to anything deprecated.

> > How about I add a little section about the defines that one can
> > use to control what the headers do, like the one I added and the
> > one I mentionned above, and any others in the same vein ?
>
> It already exists, it is dubbed "Difference between platforms".
> ALLEGRO_NO_STD_HEADERS should be document here, but I still think
> ALLEGRO_NO_COMPATIBILITY fits the  purpose of api._tx

Oh, I thought ALLEGRO_NO_STD_HEADERS was meant to avoid polluting
the global namespace. Do you mean that it's done because some
platforms don't have these include ? Win32 ?

--
Vincent Penquerc'h