On 31 May 2013 20:47, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr@gmx.ch> wrote:

On 05/28/2013 05:45 PM, Kenji Hara wrote:

It looks reasonable, but in general case it would introduce not trivial
semantic issue.

Based on the current D language spec, prefix attribute is just rewritten
to blocked attribute.

@attribute("target", T) void func(string T)() {}

to:
@attribute("target", T) {
     void func(string T)() {}
}

It is my understanding as well, but where is this actually specified?

And block attribute can contain other declarations.

@attribute("target", T) {

     enum str = T.stringof;

     void func(string T)() {}
}

Well, if the enhancement is implemented, T would be deduced by the each
call of template function foo. Then the enum value would become
undeterministic.

I think it is not implementable.

...

This does not follow.

@attribute("target", T) void func(string T)() {}

would simply need to be treated like:

template func(string T){
    @attribute("target", T) void func() {}
}

(The same would then be done for other attributes.)

I think it makes a difference only for UDA's and pragmas.

Or fully expanded:

template func(string T) {

  @attribute("target", T) {

    void func() { }

  }
}

This seems to fix the existing semantics rather nicely.