On 11/06/2012 10:18 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
For User Defined Attributes.
In the north corner we have the current champeeeeon:
-------
[ ArgumentList ]
Pros:
precedent with C#
looks nice
Cons:
not so greppable
parsing ambiguity with [array literal].func();
------
In the south corner, there's the chaaaaallenger:
@( ArgumentList )
Pros:
looks like existing @attribute syntax
no parsing problems
Cons:
not as nice looking
------
No hitting below the belt! Let the games begin!
[], because @ should be reserved for future language keywords.
Whenever people post suggested language features that require some
marking, they introduce a new @attribute, because introducing a plain
keyword breaks code. If you have @UDAs, this further limits language
expansion.
Example: let's say you want to introduce a "nogc" mark:
1. Not a nogc keyword, that could break "bool nogc;"
2. If you have @, @nogc could break an "enum nogc;" attribute.
3. Now you're stuck with __nogc or #nogc or something uglier.
There is a familiar-to-other-langauges advantage to @, but there is a
better-than-other-languages advantage to [].
My thoughts,
NMS
