Jump to page: 1 24  
Page
Thread overview
July 14

Hi All,

After asking around in the #d channel on the Libera.Chat IRC network, there seems to be consensus that it would make sense to propose an updated version of DIP64 that only focuses on Compiler-defined Attribute Consistency.

The current DIP draft can be found here.

Comments very welcome.

Best Regards,

Rune Morling

(Note that this is a cross-post from Development Internals in order to get in front of more eyeballs)

July 15
Two improvements to the grammar:

1. Don't repeat the spec, use ... to signify a copy
2. Use diff syntax for syntax highlighting

Note: there is already a tool for upgrading D code, DFix https://github.com/dlang-community/dfix
July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 15:01:05 UTC, Rune Morling wrote:

>

Hi All,

After asking around in the #d channel on the Libera.Chat IRC network, there seems to be consensus that it would make sense to propose an updated version of DIP64 that only focuses on Compiler-defined Attribute Consistency.

The current DIP draft can be found here.

Comments very welcome.

Best Regards,

Rune Morling

(Note that this is a cross-post from Development Internals in order to get in front of more eyeballs)

I'm worried not to see @const and @inout.

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 15:54:06 UTC, user1234 wrote:

> >

Comments very welcome.

I don't like that @attr is colliding with UDA.
It would be nice to have # for attr and @ for uda (or viceversa).

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 15:54:06 UTC, user1234 wrote:

>

I'm worried not to see @const and @inout.

eh those are type constructors not attributes.

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 15:54:06 UTC, user1234 wrote:

>

I'm worried not to see @const and @inout.

Those are type constructors, not attributes.

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 16:02:01 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:

>

It would be nice to have # for attr and @ for uda (or viceversa).

I think that ship sailed 10 years ago.

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 16:02:01 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:

>

It would be nice to have # for attr and @ for uda (or viceversa).

That conflicts with #line directives.

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 15:54:06 UTC, user1234 wrote:

>

I'm worried not to see @const and @inout.

Also @immutable and @shared.

July 14

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 16:18:11 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:

>

On Wednesday, 14 July 2021 at 15:54:06 UTC, user1234 wrote:

>

I'm worried not to see @const and @inout.

eh those are type constructors not attributes.

Except when they are attributes — when applied to member functions.

It makes no sense that const int variable is a constant integer while const int function() is a constant member function of some struct or class that returns non-constant integer. We should introduce @const (and others) as a proper function attribute and deprecate the ambiguous const int function() syntax.

« First   ‹ Prev
1 2 3 4