On Thursday, 7 November 2013 at 16:24:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Thursday, 7 November 2013 at 15:55:47 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Then should public and private be @public and @private in
order to be
consistent? Then we'd be inconsistent with C++, Java, C# etc.
which would make
it that much harder for folks to learn D. Would you want
@static and @const?
One thing experimented with in Volt (D derivative) design is
that all stuff that affects mangling/ABI gets own keyword
without "@" and all stuff that fades away like UDA's is
prefixed with "@". This implies @public and @private, yes, but
is quite a simple and consistent rule on its own. We will see
go it will work :) There are some tricky corner cases of course
with stuff like @nogc/nogc.
P.S. There was a mention that introduction of UDA's has made
addition of new @-prefixed built-ins impossible without
breakage. It is not entirely true as symbols used in UDA's are
qualified and conform to normal symbol lookup rules. Only
problem is that built-in stuff is pure magic and has no own
module.
So, @ for UDA only?
+1
