No, I don’t think that’s what’s happening. I can’t check right now, but as I understand it, on 0.7 the old function is run and additionally that deprecation warning is displayed with the (also available on 0.7) new version as a proposed alternative. That’s what a deprecation warning is, a notice about a future unavailability of some thing, with that thing still being accessible for the moment. On 1.0 that old function simply doesn’t exist anymore, which is why you get the method error in the first place. There’s no way to mark a function as deprecated that doesn’t exist anymore and it frankly doesn’t make sense when that function has a deprecation warning in a previous version and the removal has been properly documented (such as in the release notes of both the version introducing the deprecation as well as the version actually removing the function).
As for the rest of your post: The linked post definitely applies to you too, as it also mentions “just changing habits”. There’s nothing wrong with exclusively using 0.7 for the moment, until you’ve adapted your habits. However, if you want to develop stuff after updating your code and habits, switching to 1.0 is the reasonable choice, to prevent using older syntax by accident.