accept @pure @nothrow @return attributes

[Paolo Invernizzi via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 28 January 2015 at 15:37:28 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 15:16:50 via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
> We could also remove @ from all of the attributes, and then 
> that would be
> "completely consistent," because then only UDAs will have @ on 
> them. But the
> next time that we need to add a new attribute (which will 
> hopefully be rare,
> but it happens sometimes - e.g. with @nogc recently), then we'd 
> have to add
> a new keyword to avoid making things inconsistent, which would 
> likely break
> existing code. So, more likely, we'd just tack @ onto it (which 
> can still
> break code, but only UDA-specific code, so the breakage would 
> be far more
> minimal), and we'd be right back where we are now.

I would love this, and I would be fine with the breakage costs, 
speaking for myself.

About the problem of add more attributes in the future: well, 
maybe that solution will put a rubber floor on the number of 
attributes that can be added, as they are already a big number 
really....

It would be interesting an implementation of both the solutions, 
and recompile a bunch of big projects out from the registry with 
dub, just to finally move the discussion on numbers instead of 
"likely would break a lot / lot more / not so much breakage / 
etc" ...

I know the reply: help us trying out instead of writing!  ;-P ;-P

---
Paolo