On 6 April 2012 13:28, Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> On 4/6/2012 3:23 AM, Manu wrote:
>
>> What about:
>>
>> struct editor
>> {
>> this(string name, EditType, Colour = Colour.Default, string description
>> = null)
>> {
>> //...
>> }
>>
>> blah blah blah
>> }
>>
>> @attr(editor("thing",...blah..**.))
>>
>
> Are you really changing the arguments for every declaration? Or is it one
> set that is repeated everywhere?
>
Of course, what's the point otherwise? This is the very definition of
annotation.
Everything needs to be exposed in the editor differently.
The power of attributes are that they are tightly syntactically bound to
the items they attribute. Nobody can change any class/struct without having
the syntax force them to make any necessary corrections to their attributes
too.
I don't see the advantage over:
>> @editor(...)
>>
>> ?
>>
>
> Name collisions with other @ attributes.
>
If they were declared as normal structs, they would follow normal namespace
rules.
@company.lib.MyAttribute(...) should also be a valid expression.
The only collisions are @trusted, @safe... I think programmers can handle a
few reserved keywords.
I already can't go and name a variable whatever I want for the same
reason: int private = 10;
