On Thu, 10 May 2012 14:25:04 -0400, Adam Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2012 11:22:36 -0700, Timon Gehr <[email protected]> wrote:
On 05/10/2012 08:15 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2012 11:10:15 -0700, David Gileadi
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 5/10/12 11:01 AM, Adam Wilson wrote:
It does require some semantic information. And the solution I've seen
seen most talked about here is some kind of attribute similar to
@pure
that tells the compiler to include the implementation in the DI file.
I may be off-base here, but this strikes me as a good case for a
pragma. No?
Well, it's needs to be at a function level to be useful.
pragmas can apply to declarations.
The syntax is
pragma(identifier,...) Declaration
(Where Declaration can be the empty declaration, ';')
pragma(keepImplementation) void foo(){ ... }
That could work, although it's more typing than I personally want to do.
It depends on how much of the pragma the DI generator actually sees
though ... you'd be surprised at what it doesn't see.
pragma == specific to compiler
@attribute == language feature.
I think we should go with language feature on this one.
-Steve
