On Monday, 26 January 2015 at 11:39:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
But It's not like this really improves consistency all that
much anyway,
because public, protected, package, private, final, override,
static, const,
immutable, inout, and deprecated all don't have @. So, most
function
attributes _don't_ have @ on them, and we just added @ to some
of them,
making things even _less_ consistent. In fact, priore to this,
@safe,
@trusted, @system, and @property were the _only_ function
attributes with @
on them. So, if we really wanted to improve consistency IMHO,
we'd get rid
of @ from everything that's built-in and leave it for
user-defined
attributes, but that would break existing code too.
- Jonathan M Davis
At this point, it might be nicer to have only attributes that
exists as C++ keywords not having the @ identifier before them.
That is: public, protected, private, override, deprecated, static
and const.
But this probably doesn't make much sense now, does it?
