On Thursday, 21 January 2016 at 23:18:16 UTC, tsbockman wrote:
A revision of D that wasn't constrained by backwards compatibility would almost certainly either require all attributes to be prefixed by @, or change the grammar such that attribute names could be reused as identifier names without introducing ambiguities.
It seems to me that '@' could be allowed as optional prefix to attributes that currently don't have it without breaking code - or am I being naïve?
