Custom attributes (again)

[Manu]

On 6 April 2012 13:06, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr at gmx.ch> wrote:

> On 04/06/2012 11:57 AM, Manu wrote:
>
>> I don't think it should affect the type, although this shows a
>> conceptual problem when referring to existing attributes via the same
>> terminology. Obviously one might consider 'const', 'pure', etc
>> attributes themselves, and they clearly do affect the type.
>> Perhaps that's the key distinction between an '@'
>> attribute(/'annotation'?), and a no-'@' attribute?
>>
>
> @safe affects the type.
>

I realise that, I'm just suggesting this is a possible solution to the
confusion... if the distinction were to be made clearly.
I guess it's impossible though, can't go claiming 'safe' from the global
namespace :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20120406/9e6148e8/attachment.html>