On Monday, 26 January 2015 at 21:25:57 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:
The lexer would recognize these attributes as normal ID tokens.
The grammar could be amended to allow a function to be
decorated with keywords and generic id tokens. Then the
meaning of those tokens would be handled by semantic analysis.
How do you tell the difference between a return type and a user
attribute on the left side?
nogc myUda1 myUda2 returnType funcName() { return returnType(a); }
They are UDAs only because they are not the second-to-last id
(the return type) or the last id (the function name). How do you
do 'auto' inferred return types in this context, when the
compiler thinks your UDA is also your return type? Also, why
burden the *programmer* with having to sort this out? It's too
ambiguous to read, for my taste. If I just switch the names the
entire signature changes:
nogc returnType myUda1 myUda2 funcName() { return returnType(a); }
Now it's supposed to return a myUda2, just because you switched
the ordering? I can see why this idea would be rejected.
