@strict

[bearophile]

BCS:
> I Like the idea but I think that is a bit /to/ explicit. It makes me think 
> of the declared exceptions thing in Java. I don't remember exactly what the 
> problem is there (I've done next to no Java) but being overly explicit seems 
> to me to be an invitation for problems.

As I have designed it now it's something optional, you don't have to use @outer() if you don't want to use it. And even if you use it, you can use it in just one function in isolation (if you apply @outer to a class/module all its methods/callables will need the annotations). So I think it's very different from Java checked exceptions, that are a little viral.

Another nice thing of this idea is that you don't need to modify or remove things from D2 to implement it, it seems a purely additive change.

Bye,
bearophile