On 3/18/20 6:20 AM, WebFreak001 wrote:
I have read about @future before being some kind of opposite of
deprecated. However when trying to search about it now again I can't
find any mentions of it anywhere except on
https://dlang.org/spec/traits.html#isFuture
It's difficult enough to search for "future" but even if limiting it to
the spec it's the only search result:
https://www.google.com/search?domains=dlang.org&sourceid=google-search&q=%40future&sitesearch=dlang.org%2Fspec
There is this "future compiler concept":
https://forum.dlang.org/post/hjdstwzhcbrektlij...@forum.dlang.org
which now is however leads to a dead link, so here is a fixed link:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1007.md
In the grammar @future isn't mentioned at all, has it been removed from
the language but the trait was left over?
Maybe the documentation here should be improved to avoid confusion.
Honestly, I think that concept was never fully implemented (or maybe
followed properly). Simply because there has not been much complaint
about symbols being added "too quickly".
99.99% of the time, you add a symbol to a module, and there are no ill
effects. The problem at the time was a significant one for Sociomantic,
I believe because of a change that they needed for switching from Tango
to druntime.
If you grep druntime, there are 2 usages, both from about 2-3 years ago.
Both were either submitted by sociomantic, or asked to add the @__future
attribute from them.
I'm guessing that either interest was lost in keeping this up, or didn't
notice when things were added, and it didn't affect them. Seems like all
the focus was on the exception hierarchy (which needs TLC anyway). Maybe
someone from that org can identify how this has helped them.
The whole concept itself has some rather obscure use cases. Perhaps in
the future there will be an obvious use case, and we will be glad that
we have it.
-Steve
