On 2015-01-27 17:49, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
IMHO, if we have to search for a way to make them consistent, then there's no point. We're just going to end up with making things more consistent in one way and less in another without necessarily making it any easier for anyone to keep track of, so we'd just be shuffling things around. I think that there needs to be a clear and solid benefit to changing which attributes have @ and which don't, or we shouldn't mess with them.
We could change all attributes to be compiler recognized UDA's, which would require prefixing them with @. All current attributes would be removed. This is of course a major breaking change and will not happen.
Since they would be UDA's it would be possible to disambiguate with other UDA's with the same name in another module.
-- /Jacob Carlborg
