On 2015-04-15 10:53, Andrea Fontana wrote:
My 2 cents. If I remember correctly, "@" prefix in @safe, @trusted,
@system, etc was added just to avoid keywords pollution, right?
Now UDA uses the same prefix: if some new keywords/properties/attributes
will be added to D, the same problem will come back again... Is it a
crazy idea to deprecate @ for UDAs in favor of something else like #? In
this way @xxx will be a language attribute and #xxx will be a user
defined attribute. No pollution, no clashes.
Yes, it would be a crazy idea. Actually, there's already another syntax,
deprecated, for UDA's. It was deprecated when it was added. Then the
current syntax was added.
Maybe it's not too late to do this change. I think it will be not a big
effort to replace uda syntax in existing projects (a deprecation warning
will help).
No, the solution is to add any new attributes, not as keywords but as
compiler recognized UDA's. Then it's possible to use the fully qualified
name of the UDA to disambiguate.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
