On 27 November 2012 11:16, Manu <turkey...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 November 2012 09:42, Gor Gyolchanyan <gor.f.gyolchan...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi, fellow D programmers. >> >> I'd like to know (and I think I'm not alone with this) the future plans >> about UDAs, the features they're planned to have and the features they're >> planned not to have. >> I have a curious project, which would be vastly easier and cleaner with >> proper UDAs, so naturally I'd like to know what to expect, because if what I >> need is planned to be available, I'll postpone my project, instead of >> rushing into an ugly solution. >> >> AFAIK, currently UDAs are set at declaration site, are immutable and the >> declaration cannot get additional UDAs externally. > > > This is true, and variable UDA's would be nice. Attributed variable > declarations it should be trivial, but I guess the problem is if you > attribute members of a struct, or any type its self for that matter, then > each instance of that type would have to have respective UDA instances, > that's not so simple. Where do they allocate? Are they part of the struct or > not? >
As far as I can tell, it's all just metadata known at compile-time only. Nothing is written in the resultant binaries or object files produced. -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';