accept @pure @nothrow @return attributes

[uri via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 27 January 2015 at 04:10:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 1/26/15 7:25 PM, Zach the Mystic wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 27 January 2015 at 02:40:16 UTC, Walter Bright 
>> wrote:
>>> On 1/26/2015 6:15 PM, Zach the Mystic wrote:
>>>> What's keeping you from committing to 'dfix' as the way to 
>>>> solve
>>>> issues like the
>>>> one in this thread?
>>>
>>> Inertia of people being reluctant to use it. It's still work 
>>> for
>>> people to use, it's not part of their build process.
>>
>> What about compiler integration? I'm talking about fundamental 
>> language
>> changes. Why would people use it if it didn't have official 
>> backing and
>> wasn't part of the compiler package? In this post:
>>
>> http://forum.dlang.org/post/uimpnhiweuitnnbeqshu@forum.dlang.org
>>
>> ... I said: 'For example, let's say dfix is included with the 
>> compiler
>> package.
>> Now you get an error, saying: "Error: `@nogc` is no longer
>> accepted, but can be automatically replaced with `nogc`. Run 
>> dfix
>> on this file? (y/n)"... or whatever is deemed the secure 
>> approach
>> to this feature.'
>>
>> That's what I mean by "commiting to dfix."
>
> I'm ready to commit to dfix. Problem is many of the changes 
> suggested are unlikely to mark much improvement, while miring 
> us in the perpetual illusion of making progress. The fact that 
> we can avail ourselves of a tactical tool that makes changes 
> easy is helpful but also opens opportunity of abuse.
>
> Let's stop shuffling the deck. I mean it. Stop shuffling the 
> freaking deck. Fix the real issues in the language. Add new 
> libraries. Be original. Be creative. Do real work.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrei

Well said.

I've been wavering for a few months between D and Python for 
teams on smaller internal projects. IMO this is the right 
attitude from core D devs to finish off D2.

Cheers,
uri