Multiple attribute specifiers

[Steve Horne]

On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 19:31:01 +0100, Stewart Gordon
<smjg_1998 at yahoo.com> wrote:

>Can you remember anything at all about this post?  Such as who wrote it, 
>or enough words from the subject line or body that there is some hope of 
>finding it?

I'm pretty sure he means me, so I'll just repost this with the
crossposting...

: First, I'm just a newb making noise, so don't necessarily pay too much
: attention. I was just saying how I interpreted the behaviour, and what
: the apparent plus side might be.
: 
: 
: Second, there seems to be three different ways to apply a modifier.
: 
: 1.  The C++-style colon syntax.
: 2.  The multi-definition block with braces.
: 3.  The single line definition.
: 
: On principle, writing two access modifiers in the same style should
: generate a warning (same modifier given twice) or an error (modifiers
: conflict). But one form overriding another (or nesting the block form)
: probably not.

The above referring to things like...

  class xxx
  {
    public:
      many declarations;

      private one_exceptional_declaration;

      many declarations;
  }

: 
: Basically, don't allow...
: 
:   public private blah;
: 
: or...
: 
:   private public
:     {
:       blah;
:     }
: 
: I just don't think this is such a big deal. There are other errors
: that D can't catch. There are errors D never will be able to catch.
: This one, sure, in an ideal world it should. But is it really an error
: that people will make? And even if they do, how much trouble will it
: really cause?
: 
: But then again, appearances can be important too, I suppose.

-- 
Remove 'wants' and 'nospam' from e-mail.