Compiler hints, inlining and syntax consistency

[Dicebot]

On Sunday, 29 December 2013 at 11:02:33 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> And my answer to that was probably something like: that module 
> name could already be in use today.

Can't remember :) It won't if such modules will used a common 
reserved package name (__dmd.attributes or __compiler.attributes).

> Also, then we get a third way of naming keywords:
>
> @property nothrow @reserved.foobar int bar ();

Is it bad? Why would anyone want to qualify it explicitly?

My proposal to resolve such name clash was to use existing symbol 
resolution rules and add explicit symbol import in such cases:

import __compiler.attributes : property; // takes precedence over 
"silent" import AFAIK