accept @pure @nothrow @return attributes

[Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d]

On 2015-01-26 17:10, Jonathan Marler wrote:
> I agree with Jonathan's points, this solution doesn't seem like an
> improvement.   If I understand the problem, we don't want to make every
> attribute use the '@' symbol because it looks bad and would cause a lot
> of code changes for sake of consistency. However, on the other hand, we
> don't want to support the new properties because we have to add them as
> keywords which would break code using those words and would make the
> language more restrictive (nothing can be named nogc/safe/...).
>
> Assuming I understand the problem, couldn't we modify the language
> grammar to support more attributes without making them keywords?  Then
> we can omit the '@' on future code (and fix the old code if we want) and
> we don't have to litter the language with new keywords.
>
> I understand that doing this may be fairly complicated.  This may create
> some ambiguities in the grammar that would need to be handled carefully,
> but if it can work I think this would be a good option.

We could use compiler recognized UDA's. It's not complicated, at least 
no in the case I've implemented it.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg