[ ArgumentList ] vs. @( ArgumentList )

[Artur Skawina]

On 11/06/12 22:02, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 06, 2012 11:18:34 Walter Bright wrote:
>> No hitting below the belt! Let the games begin!
> 
> Definitely @(ArgumentList). It fits with what other languages do, and it matches 
> what we're already doing for attributes. I also think that's what pretty much 
> everyone was figuring would be used for user-defined attributes. The only major 
> problem would be if @ArgumentList is allowed when there's only a single 
> argument, then code could break when new built-in attributes are added.

Easy - do not introduce any new *global* built-in attributes, ever. There's no
reason why they all can't use the same look-up rules.

As to the syntax - it doesn't matter, as long as it isn't "[ArgumentList]" as that
one is ambiguous (from a programmer POV, even if the compiler could deal with it -
which i'm not convinced is the case here, considering all contexts where
attributes have to be allowed and the inevitable evolution of this feature).

"@[ArgumentList]".

artur