what does 'deprecated' mean with respect to "bare structure types"?

[james anderson]

good afternoon;

upon pulling and building with the current cffi version, one observes, that the elementary form of references to structure types has fallen into disfavor and leads to a style warning, to the effect, that such forms are "deprecated". that term might lead one to understand such a form to be ambiguous, inconsistent or incompatible some introduced mechanism, or to be expected to impair future changes for similar reason. when, however, one regards the related commentary in the usage documentation and examines the code locations which concern the deprecation, it appears, that the semantics of the elementary form is unambiguously known and supported in all contexts, that there is no indication of impending changes which would change this situation, and that, given these circumstances, the deprecation warning is gratuitous and can actually be ignored.

is this a true comprehension of the situation?

if i have overlooked or disregarded some key aspect of this change, please advise.

best regards, from berlin,