Proposal: user defined attributes

[deadalnix]

Le 16/03/2012 19:23, Andrej Mitrovic a écrit :
> On 3/16/12, Adam D. Ruppe<destructionator at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> The current language solution isn't really *bad* with enough
>> library help, but it isn't particularly *good* either and I
>> don't think it can be. I've tried a few things, and I still
>> see the lack of user annotations as D's biggest miss right now.
>
> Yeah, but I would say if we had even better compile-time introspection
> we could have the freedom to implement any number of annotation
> implementations in library code. When you put something into the
> language you have to depend on C++ hackers to implement and then
> inevitably fix the upcoming bugs in the front-end (ICEs are an
> annoying blocker), and there's always that issue where the devs are
> against adding new features to an existing language feature. (say
> annotations were implemented, soon enough someone is going to complain
> it doesn't have enough functionality and that it needs to be
> extended).
>
> Personally I'd love it if we had more __traits and compile-time
> introspection abilities.

And not just introspection, but modification would be king.