User Defined Attributes

[Walter Bright]

On 11/7/2012 3:05 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> For me the analogy with Exceptions is pretty good. The issues an conveniences
> of throwing anything or annotating a symbol with anything instead of just
> type are pretty much the same.

That's a good point, I just want to wryly remark on the consistency argument 
that UDAs should work everywhere, but the inconsistency argument that they 
should not work for basic types :-)


> I only see functions making sense to be accepted
> as annotations too (that's what Python do with annotations, @annotation symbol
> is the same as symbol = annotation(symbol), but is quite a different language).

Just functions? I thought one big use of UDAs was to mark classes as "serializable".