I actually quite liked Tristan's argument. [attr, attr2] feels more like what it is, an annotation. It does nothing, has no effect on the declaration on its own. the @attr syntax looks like existing attributes, and with that kinda comes the presumption that they actually DO something, affect the code generated in some way. For that reason, I buy the argument that [attrs...] being visually distinct makes more sense, more like what it is.
Perhaps it should be termed 'annotation' rather than 'attribute'? On 6 November 2012 21:38, ponce <[email protected]> wrote: > I like @(ArgumentList) better for stated reason: it looks like > existing @attributes. >
