Daniel Keep wrote:
Yes, but then they're just keywords, with an @ in front. You'd just be
kidding yourself if you think you've reduced the keyword count.
I suspect the reasoning goes like this:
* I want attributes. Walter doesn't see the use.
* Walter complains about adding keywords.
* I can make keywords look like attributes, and then I get attributes!
:P
The idea is just stolen from C#/Java. I guess the idea is that 1.
keywords/annotations are in a different namespace and 2. even compile
time "keyword" annotations can be handled as normal identifiers. The
second point means introducing a new keyword is like declaring a new
identifier in object.d.
But it would also allow users shadowing annotation "keywords" by
defining their own annotations, which might be a problem or not.
