Cleaned up translator API. Deleted unsupported dead code.

Cleaned up translator API. Deleted unsupported dead code.
BUG=9

[dgkoch, 2010-07-19 21:32:32]

Hi Alok,

My main question about these changes are: what is the motivation?  It is simply
to clean up unused code, or is this getting in the way for implementing
additional functionality?

I'm not sure I like the idea of deleting the linker, unnecessarily.  While we
may not be using it currently, I could see potential use cases for it in the
future and would rather not just throw it away. 

Daniel

[Alok Priyadarshi, 2010-07-20 18:49:21]

My motivation was simply to delete unused code and make the translator API less
confusing for the third-party developers.

I did not know you have plans for using the linker. I can leave it there in that
case. But if you are not sure I would rather delete it for now and bring it back
later as needed - it will always be there in the svn. The translator API may
evolve as we add more functionality (webgl, etc) or address security issues. The
linker API may get left behind and you will have to redo it in the future
anyway.

[kbr1, 2010-07-20 18:59:41]

On 2010/07/20 18:49:21, alokp wrote:
> My motivation was simply to delete unused code and make the translator API
less
> confusing for the third-party developers.
> 
> I did not know you have plans for using the linker. I can leave it there in
that
> case. But if you are not sure I would rather delete it for now and bring it
back
> later as needed - it will always be there in the svn. The translator API may
> evolve as we add more functionality (webgl, etc) or address security issues.
The
> linker API may get left behind and you will have to redo it in the future
> anyway.

I think that if this code is likely to be used in the future that it should be
left in place; it is easy to forget about code which has been deleted. However I
don't feel strongly about this, so I'd like to defer this review and discussion
to you and Daniel.

[dgkoch, 2010-07-21 03:11:51]

On 2010/07/20 18:59:41, kbr1 wrote:
> On 2010/07/20 18:49:21, alokp wrote:
> > My motivation was simply to delete unused code and make the translator API
> less
> > confusing for the third-party developers.
> > 
> > I did not know you have plans for using the linker. I can leave it there in
> that
> > case. But if you are not sure I would rather delete it for now and bring it
> back
> > later as needed - it will always be there in the svn. The translator API may
> > evolve as we add more functionality (webgl, etc) or address security issues.
> The
> > linker API may get left behind and you will have to redo it in the future
> > anyway.
> 
> I think that if this code is likely to be used in the future that it should be
> left in place; it is easy to forget about code which has been deleted. However
I
> don't feel strongly about this, so I'd like to defer this review and
discussion
> to you and Daniel.

There is a possibility that we may do a d3d9-bytecode backend instead of HLSL
backend at some point in the future. 
However, I talked it over with our compiler engineer and he doesn't think the
linker interface as it exists is really very useful. 
If needed we would likely be better of with a completely custom implementation
and matching interface if there is a need to do this.

So feel free to go ahead and remove this.

Daniel

[Alok Priyadarshi, 2010-07-21 18:52:12]

Thanks Daniel.