"Jonathan M Davis"  wrote in message news:xjmfhegvanqdivhbtlpp@forum.dlang.org...

> AFAIK, the only reason that it's not deprecated is that no one has bothered to make the change (and you didn't want to deprecate it when you went through all  of those and updated their status a while back). Andrei has stated on multiple occasions that it's going, and I think that Walter has said the same. Arguably, it should have been deprecated ages ago. The only good argument I see for keeping it around is that we don't have the custom allocators yet, so it's royal pain for anyone to construct classes on the malloc heap instead of on the GC heap (since using emplace to do it is non-trivial), and anyone who's using delete and really doesn't want to wait for the GC to collect the memory doesn't have an easy alternative at the moment.

Until it actually gets merged in, nothing is certain.  delete is not particularly dangerous now that we have @safe working, and it might be nice to have on non-GC platforms.  Anyway, that's a discussion for when somebody actually tries to get rid of it. 

On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 13:49:47 +0000
Aerolite via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com>
wrote:

> The discrepancy between the annotation-style attributes such as '@safe', '@property', etc and the keyword attributes 'pure' and 'nothrow' has always really bugged me ever since I started using D.
we can also turn 'const' to '@const' and this will end annoying
confusion between `const T foo ();` and `const(T) foo ();`.

but it's fun to see confused people, so i'm against it. ;-)

On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 20:17:10 +0000
Brian Schott via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:

> It would be nice if we could at least allow both "nothrow" and "@nothrow".
i believe this patch should be trivial. i'll try to look at this issue closer and maybe produce another useless patch to rot in bugzilla. ;-)

On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 20:17:10 +0000
Brian Schott via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:

> It would be nice if we could at least allow both "nothrow" and "@nothrow".
here it is, another useless patch: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13388

i'm sure that it will never be accepted in mainline, so i don't bother attaching any unittests. just believe me: it works. ;-)

On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:50:48 +0000
Aerolite via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com>
wrote:

> So no chance even of this?
already done: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13388