Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Tue Aug 22 06:11:13 PDT 2017

On 8/21/17 9:20 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Regardless, it means that I would need to run a tool to figure out which
> attributes actually applied to a function rather than just reading it like I
> could do now. And the fact that this is can be done with UDAs right now is
> _not_ a plus. I can understand wanting to reduce the number of attributes
> being manually applied to functions, but I think that hiding them with
> aliases and/or combined attributes is a maintenance nightmare and would
> argue that it's just plain bad practice.

Not for or against the DIP, but this is already the case, due to block 
attributes. I have to search around the file to find out whether pure: 
is at the top, etc. In fact, I've made recommendations many times on PRs 
to add an attribute to a function, to find out it's already handled at 
the top.

I would think documentation generation should solve the issues.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list