On 02/27/2010 08:18 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Oh, it's far worse than that. In C++, public and private are labels. They
don't go on each individual function. You'd probably have to parse the code
to correctly, automatically manipulate the labels into attributes. And D
supports public and private as labels in addition to going on each function,
so you'd have the problem with both C++ and D code. What you suggest would
work for Java, and I'm pretty sure that it works for C# (it's been a while
since I've coded in it though, so I don't recall for certain which way they
use public and private), but for C++, D1, and older D2 code, it wouldn't
work.
So, unless the suggestion is that public and private be allowed as labels,
and then when they're used on functions, they're now attributes, then simple
text replacement doesn't work. And I really think that leaving them as
labels and having them as attributes on functions would make the two uses
too different.
Besides, I see no gain in making public and private attributes. They're
already keywords, if you leave them as labels, they have to remain keywords,
so I see no gain in making them attributes. It just makes porting code
harder.
- Jonathan M Davis
Is there something wrong with this:
class A {
@private:
/* things */
@public:
/* public things */
}
..?
Seeing as the label-like syntax works today for, well, almost anything.
Like this:
void main(string[] args) {
writeln(atoi("12"));
}
extern (C):
int atoi(const(char)* s);
