On 2/2/15 5:34 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Monday, February 02, 2015 13:01:28 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 2/2/2015 6:43 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I'm pretty sure the only controversy is that you want it to be a
pragma, everyone else wants it to be an attribute.
That's correct.
My reasoning is simple - an attribute defines the semantics of the interface, a
pragma gives instructions to the compiler, and does not affect logical
semantics.
For example, attributes change the name mangling, because it affects the
semantic interface. A pragma would not.
That makes sense, though the one issue that I see with making it a pragma is
the fact that pragmas are supposed to be compiler-specific and not part of
the language (at least as I understand it)
From http://dlang.org/pragma.html#predefined-pragmas:
"All implementations must support these, even if by just ignoring them:"
I would believe that inline would definitely be one that could be
ignored, seeing as the code generated whether inlining or not creates
the same end result.
But you could put it under that list, and then most compilers will
support it. Remember, all 3 major compilers here are based on the same
front-end code.
-Steve
