On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:20:41 +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2015-01-26 20:50, Walter Bright wrote: > >> It's good to have this discussion. >> >> Previously, it's all been advocacy and "break my code" by forcing a >> change from pure => @pure. >> >> Just a few days ago on slashdot, an anonymous D user wrote: >> >> "A horrible mix of keywords and annotation syntax for >> function/method attributes ('const', 'pure', and 'nothrow' are all >> keywords, but '@property', and '@nogc' are annotations)" >> >> for why he won't use D anymore. >> >> Frankly, I think that is a great bikeshedding non-issue that distracts >> us from what is important. I hope that by doing this PR, we can >> actually decide that it isn't worth it, i.e. I'd be happy to get >> consensus and revert it. > > How is this change going to help when there's still a bunch of > attributes that can not be prefixed with '@', immutable, const, public > and so on?
who cares? it's SLASHDOT USER! i doubt that he wrote anything except "helloworld" in D, but it's SLASHDOT USER! reddit and slashdot users are first-class citizens for D, and actual D users are of no importance.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature