Removal of pre-ISO C++ items from include/backwards

[Robert Dewar]

skaller wrote:

> I think this is the wrong idea. Deprecated does carry a lot
> of weight. It allows a new compiler without a legacy
> to elide the feature and specify it is ISO compliant
> 'minus' the deprecated features, which is quite different
> from 'non-compliant'.

are you sure? I thought conformance required deprecated features
to be allowed
> 
> In particular, for a product like gcc it means a switch
> like --no-deprecated-features can be added and then
> used by a client without risking 'all bets are off
> since the compiler isn't conforming'.

You can always add any switch to do anything, the standard only
requires that there be a mode that is conformant.