On 2013-06-11 23:04, QAston wrote:
Ok, i see the point now, thanks :). Maybe it'd be worth to enforce that convention on a language level, let's say: only types with @attribute can be used as UDA. One reason for making that restriction is that when there's more than a one way of doing something people will do that using all the ways possible. This may be a problem to code which uses many libraries simultanously - your utility functions will not interoperate with UDAs made by someone else.
Yes, I would like to have the language enforce this. My utility function fetches by default types that are marked with @attribute. You can add flag when calling the function to fetch all UDA's.
BTW I've just found one use case for anonymous UDA: @(Enum.Entry) is verbose, the question is: "Is it useful enough to keep it, or maybe having single convention is better?"
Is it possible to attach a UDA to an enum member? Or is it possible to figure out that it's an enum member and check if the enum itself has @attribute attached to it?
-- /Jacob Carlborg
