On Friday, 25 April 2014 at 14:01:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
It is unacceptable to have code that fails with one compiler
and works with the other despite the shared frontend version.
Such "enhanced" @nogc attributes must be placed into
compiler-specific attribute space and not as a core language
feature.
Like I said, this may be the ideologically correct position,
but please explain to the poor user that even though the
compiler does not invoke the GC in his function, it still
cannot be @nogc.
I think in this case, @nogc is not a good name.
Which is the very reason why I was so insisting of defining exact
set of cases when optimisation is to be guaranteed in spec
(before releasing @nogc). Unfortunately, with no success.
But what really is the difference between a function that is
marked as @nogc that compiles on compiler X but not compiler Y,
and some custom attribute that compiles on X but not Y?
There are no user-defined attributes that can possibly fail on
only some compiler. And compiler-specific attributes are part of
that compiler documentation and never part of language spec. This
is the difference.
