Attribute transference from callbacks?

[Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole]

On 11/12/2024 11:45 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> Well, this is more sane than the "contract invalidation" proposal in 
> that it is explicit, does not change the meaning of existing code, and 
> allows somewhat more composition patterns. It's also forward-compatible 
> with a proper solution, while most likely remaining more convenient for 
> the cases where it is sufficient.
> 
> So maybe it's worth pursuing to stop some of the bleeding, but this will 
> run into its own limitations very quickly.

Contract invalidation can be explicit with the help of an attribute and 
I'm fine with any argument supporting its need as I agree its probably 
the better way to go.

But, it is a quick and dirty solution that doesn't solve the underlying 
problem of type qualifiers and attributes invalidation based upon the call.

What it does do is solve ``opApply``.

This proposal of Steven's is pretty much identical in nature.

Unfortunately only you seem to have any understanding of what a solution 
could look like and I've been failing to make any head way on it.