Universal Function Attribute Inference

[Paul Backus]

On Thursday, 29 February 2024 at 21:21:12 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 February 2024 at 17:18:04 UTC, Paul Backus 
> wrote:
>> [...]
>
> What about only doing inference when something fails to compile 
> due to a missing attribute?

This would completely break separate compilation, but it would 
still be a bad idea even if it didn't. Having the attributes of a 
function depend on the code that calls it violates modularity and 
creates all kinds of opportunities for "spooky action at a 
distance."

Also as far as I can tell there is literally zero upside to this 
approach compared to the original version. What is all of this 
additional complexity supposed to be buying us?