Mitigating the attribute proliferation - attribute inference for functions

[jmh530 via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 16:40:56 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
> However, it has way too many holes in it still, because we've 
> blacklisted rather than whitelisted

Not being a fan of constantly writing these attributes, I had 
been thinking a month or so ago that it would be cool if you 
could just specify defaults for the function attributes on a 
module-by-module basis. However, it's pretty easy to just set 
something similar up using the existing language features.

import std.traits;

@safe
{
	int foo(int x)
	{
		return x * 2;
	}
	int bar(int x) @system
	{
		return x * 2;
	}
}

void main()
{
	static assert(functionAttributes!foo & FunctionAttribute.safe);
	static assert(functionAttributes!bar & FunctionAttribute.system);
}

It even generates the correct documentation that foo is @safe and 
bar is @system.

I think this might be similar to Martin Nowak's point about 
@unsafe { } guards, but I'm not entirely sure what he meant.