On 9/11/2024 4:53 AM, Manu wrote:
> Just to be clear; nobody I'm aware of has proposed that design, so I hope that's
> not your take-away.
Indeed I thought you were proposing that, glad you're not!
> My proposal is to allow a hint attached strictly to control statements. (ideally
> as a suffix)
> It is easy to read, also easy to ignore (this is important), and extremely
> low-impact when marking up existing code: no new lines, no rearranging of code,
> purely additive; strictly appends to the end of existing control statements...
> these are very nice properties for casually marking up some code where it proves
> to be profitable, without interfering with readability, or even interfering with
> historic diff's in any meaningful way that might make it annoying to review.
How is that materially different from [[likely]] annotations?
The article given above shows why arbitrary hints given as stand-alone statements in a flow causes nonsense when conflicting annotations appear within a flow.
Attaching exactly one annotation specifically to a control statement that describes a branch is not at risk of nonsense cases.