User Defined Attributes

[Sönke Ludwig]

Am 06.11.2012 09:26, schrieb Walter Bright:
> On 11/6/2012 12:20 AM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:> But shouldn't we keep the
> syntax closer to normal attributes and other
>> languages(*)? I see a lot of arguments for doing that, with the only
>> counter-argument that they would be in the same namespace as the
>> built-in attributes (which should not be that bad, as this is very low
>> level language stuff).
>>
>> (*) i.e. @mytype or @("string") and without the '[]'
> 
> 
> We can debate the syntax. I don't have a store set by this one. I was
> more interested in getting the semantics right. Anyhow, it's nice to
> have a working prototype to experiment with rather than a paper airplane.

Definitely! Thanks a lot for tackling this, to me this seems like
something that can get a real killer feature for the language!