accept @pure @nothrow @return attributes

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 28 January 2015 at 22:58:02 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling wrote:
> On 26/01/15 22:29, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> However my complaint is not about the change itself (though I 
>> personally
>> disagree with Don reasoning in that issue, it is a delicate 
>> matter) but about
>> the fact that it is again done as a casual PR and our breaking 
>> change culture
>> does not seem to change : it is still all or nothing approach. 
>> No automatic
>> migration tools, no easily found rationale / explanation, no 
>> posts in D.announce
>> - just an ordinary commit. No wonder any of more notable 
>> change is considered
>> that scary.
>
> I don't have any disagreement with your request for better 
> reporting and public justification of decisions like this, but 
> I don't understand why you consider it a breaking change.  It's 
> not backwards-incompatible -- the existing pure and nothrow 
> will still work (which I just verified by building druntime and 
> phobos with a dmd instance built from the controversial commit).

I haven't said it is a breaking change on its own - but that 
doesn't mean it is any considerably better migration-wise.

> BTW what is @return meant to achieve?  I realize I'm not 
> familiar with this attribute.

http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP25