On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:09:05 +0300, Don <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
#ponce wrote:
Definitely. And what about @deprecated and @override?
As override is now required, i don't think it should be an attribute.
As I understand it, one of the characteristics of attributes is that you
should be able to remove them from the entire program, without affecting
the behaviour. All they are doing is adding additional compile-time
constraints. (const and immutable aren't attributes, because you're
allowed to overload functions based on them).
So @deprecated is definitely an attribute.
Is override really required? I've just tested on DMD2.037, and it still
accepts functions without it. So at present it is behaving like an
attribute. But if it became mandatory, I'm not so sure.
override is required when compiling with -w.
By Walter's definition, @property is not a valid attribute, because by
removing it the program will fail to compile (due to missing parens in
accessors). Either that or omissible empty parens will still be present,
but I see no usefulness of @property in that case.
