accept @pure @nothrow @return attributes

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d]

On 26/01/15 22:29, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> However my complaint is not about the change itself (though I personally
> disagree with Don reasoning in that issue, it is a delicate matter) but about
> the fact that it is again done as a casual PR and our breaking change culture
> does not seem to change : it is still all or nothing approach. No automatic
> migration tools, no easily found rationale / explanation, no posts in D.announce
> - just an ordinary commit. No wonder any of more notable change is considered
> that scary.

I don't have any disagreement with your request for better reporting and public 
justification of decisions like this, but I don't understand why you consider it 
a breaking change.  It's not backwards-incompatible -- the existing pure and 
nothrow will still work (which I just verified by building druntime and phobos 
with a dmd instance built from the controversial commit).

BTW what is @return meant to achieve?  I realize I'm not familiar with this 
attribute.