…trigger_deprecation() (nicolas-grekas)This PR was merged into the 5.1-dev branch.Discussion----------[Contracts/Deprecation] don't use assert(), rename to trigger_deprecation()| Q             | A| ------------- | ---| Branch?       | master| Bug fix?      | no| New feature?  | no| Deprecations? | no| Tickets       | -| License       | MIT| Doc PR        | -This PR is a follow up the discussion that happened in#35526.I applied all the suggestions I received so far on this previous PR so that we can discuss them all together.Here are the changes:- the most important change is to *not* use `assert()` anymore. This fixes the objection from@ostrolucky and@derrabus that deprecations and assert() should not be bound to each other. Instead, in order to still make the function a no-op when wanted, it is suggested that apps declare an empty function. This will be more flexible in practice I believe and keeps all the benefits we envisioned by using assert();- as suggested by@fabpot, the function is renamed `trigger_deprecation()` instead of `deprecated()`. Because the implementation is now not conditional anymore (from the package pov, since assert() is not used), my arguments to keep the previous name don't stand as strong as before to me so I'm fine renaming.- type hints are added back (requiring PHP 7.1 to use `void`). As mentioned in the 1st point, ppl that really want deprecations to be no-ops will redeclare the function as empty, thus not using any types, thus reclaiming all the perf diff. And for ppl that do want to catch deprecations, the overhead of types is negligible compared to any processing of the deprecations themselves.WDYT?All points can be discussed separately if needed of course. I'm personally fine with merging the PR as is, with all 3 changes.Commits-------0032b2a [Contracts/Deprecation] don't use assert(), rename to trigger_deprecation()