On 23 June 2014 23:58, Grogan via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 23 June 2014 at 22:16:22 UTC, Grogan wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, 23 June 2014 at 22:02:26 UTC, Tobias Pankrath wrote:
>>>>
>>>> import std.stdio;
>>>>
>>>> @safe int safe()
>>>> {
>>>>         auto i = 8;
>>>>         return i;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> void main(string ars[])
>>>> {
>>>>         writeln(safe);
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>>
>>>> What you want is just impossible...
>>>
>>>
>>> Would be a good use case for dfix. It really isn't hard to rename every identifier consistently.
>>
>>
>> Maybe the future will tell you you're right...
>> From my point of view this change is a very unprobable one but who knows ?
>> ^^
>>
>> People are skeptikal about the the air-skate too...
>> I don't wanna be segregative...
>
>
> I meant the 'hoverboard' of course...
>
> BTW I think '@' makes sense. And another BTW: in your fantastic nazi plan
> which consists into eradicating the '@' prefix, how would look the UDA ?
> I mean that '@' has a signification in the D grammar not only for predifined
> attributes, but also for user ones...
>

Godwin's Law.

I am actually in favour of adding more @ symbols. I think it makes it clear which things are attributes, and it makes user defined attributes look like the built in ones. So the built in ones look less special.

On Monday, 23 June 2014 at 20:23:52 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
> On Monday, 23 June 2014 at 20:08:41 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
>> All are having the @ added: http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP64
>
> This hasn't been decided on. It's just a proposal right now.

While I agree with the original statement that the @ is ugly, I also would prefer to just bring other attributes into this consistent style.