On 11/06/12 22:02, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Tuesday, November 06, 2012 11:18:34 Walter Bright wrote: >> No hitting below the belt! Let the games begin! > > Definitely @(ArgumentList). It fits with what other languages do, and it > matches > what we're already doing for attributes. I also think that's what pretty much > everyone was figuring would be used for user-defined attributes. The only > major > problem would be if @ArgumentList is allowed when there's only a single > argument, then code could break when new built-in attributes are added.
Easy - do not introduce any new *global* built-in attributes, ever. There's no reason why they all can't use the same look-up rules. As to the syntax - it doesn't matter, as long as it isn't "[ArgumentList]" as that one is ambiguous (from a programmer POV, even if the compiler could deal with it - which i'm not convinced is the case here, considering all contexts where attributes have to be allowed and the inevitable evolution of this feature). "@[ArgumentList]". artur
