Jesse Phillips, el 28 de enero a las 15:39 me escribiste: > Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > > > In the "Function calls" thread the question of "which attributes should > > be in the @-namespace" has again come up. > > > > > > Problem: > > Currently, there doesn't seem to be any clear definition of which > > attributes should be prefixed with @ and which shouldn't. New > > attributes get an @, while already existing attributes don't, and it all > > seems a bit arbitrary. Then again, we probably don't want *all* > > attributes to be written with @, as that would just make code look messy: > > To me attributes can make the code look uglier and, as pointed out, > there there really is no clear seperation. > > So in my opinion, to keep the code looking clean attributes should only > include those for the function, not its parameters. This prevents in, > out, ref, const, etc. and allows for @safe, @property, etc.
D attributes[1] can't be part of parameters. That are InOut "modifiers" or storage classes[2] (there are some overlapping between the two, for example the keyword const is a storage class *and* an attribute, that can be the cause of confusion). [1] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/attribute.html [2] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/declaration.html -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ----------------------------------------------------------------------