On 2015-01-26 17:10, Jonathan Marler wrote:
I agree with Jonathan's points, this solution doesn't seem like an
improvement. If I understand the problem, we don't want to make every
attribute use the '@' symbol because it looks bad and would cause a lot
of code changes for sake of consistency. However, on the other hand, we
don't want to support the new properties because we have to add them as
keywords which would break code using those words and would make the
language more restrictive (nothing can be named nogc/safe/...).
Assuming I understand the problem, couldn't we modify the language
grammar to support more attributes without making them keywords? Then
we can omit the '@' on future code (and fix the old code if we want) and
we don't have to litter the language with new keywords.
I understand that doing this may be fairly complicated. This may create
some ambiguities in the grammar that would need to be handled carefully,
but if it can work I think this would be a good option.
We could use compiler recognized UDA's. It's not complicated, at least
no in the case I've implemented it.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
