Proposal: user defined attributes

[Don Clugston]

On 20/03/12 22:29, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-03-20 17:13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 3/20/12 10:52 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> On 2012-03-20 16:17, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> On 3/20/12 12:50 AM, Kapps wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps we should add a field of type Variant[string].
>>>
>>> No, not Variant[string] again.
>>
>> Why? I thought it was agreed that that's a good idea for exceptions.
>
> Maybe you agreed on that. I still don't like it.

I'm not sure who agreed, but I don't even think it would work. What 
happens if the AA or Variant throws an exception? Especially if AAs 
become a library type, they've got no business being in something as 
fundamental as an exception base class.

It leads to a big ball of mud design.