The future of UDAs.

[foobar]

On Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 14:17:40 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 11/29/12 6:44 AM, foobar wrote:
>> On Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 10:25:40 UTC, Walter Bright 
>> wrote:
>>> On 11/29/2012 6:40 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>>> On 2012-11-29 03:00, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> An attribute would bring along with it the notion of having 
>>>>> some static
>>>>> constructors care about dependencies and others not. A 
>>>>> pragma would be
>>>>> global to the module.
>>>>
>>>> Why can't the attribute be global to the module?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because attributes attach to the declarations they enclose. A 
>>> global
>>> attribute would be something else.
>>
>> What's wrong with attaching the annotation to the module 
>> declaration?
>> i.e.
>> @no_circular_ctors module foobar;
>
> I think this entire approach is unprincipled (aside from 
> solving a problem that's not urgent and not important). We 
> shouldn't focus on the _syntax_ of the completely unprincipled 
> approach, but instead on improving it.
>
> A possibly better approach would be e.g. to do a simple 
> analysis of the static constructor's use of symbols, and use 
> that set to decide whether two static constructors must be 
> ordered or not.
>
>
> Andrei

Huh?
I made the exact same observation you did that module 
declarations can also carry attributes. You completely ignored 
the main part of my post regarding what I feel would indeed be a 
better approach (IMO).

I don't understand why you bother to answer a post you haven't 
bothered to read.