On Thursday, 29 January 2015 at 17:51:06 UTC, Jonathan Marler
wrote:
On Thursday, 29 January 2015 at 17:32:30 UTC, Nick Treleaven
wrote:
No, the idea proposed was:
@safe @override const func();
@abstract class C{}
const var = 5;
__gshared gvar = 4;
const is never @const. @abstract is always @abstract. It is
variables that don't use @attribute syntax. This is not
something I invented, it follows on from existing uses of
@attributes and __keywords already supported by dmd.
Nick I'm putting together the FAQ right now. I don't quite
understand this proposal. Could you outline it for me? I'd
like to know exactly what words would require an '@' symbol.
What is the criteria for when to use an '@' and when not to use
one? This current rule is (use '@' if it is not a
keyword)...so what would the new rule be? Thanks.
Does it really matter ? Please put your first post in there and
be done with it. These proposal are not gonna happen anyway (the
ROI is simply not there).
