Hello,

on Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:10:21 +0200 you (Corentin via Liaison
<liaison_at_[hidden]>) wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, 21:41 Gašper Ažman via Liaison <
> liaison_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > Personally I'm not married to the current grammar, but we do need a
> > plausible alternative, and we need it soon.
> >
> > An alternative syntax needs to have:
> > - an obvious terminator (a comma is not that, especially for assert)
> > - somewhere to do the preamble (pre:, post r:, assert: )
> > - not be current valid syntax.
> >
> > Thinking out loud here, but could braces work?
> >
>
> The previous suggestions about
>
> pre: :
> post :
> assert:
>
> can only conflict with labels.
> A quick scan of the vcpkg repository (649389 files) does not show any
> conflict
> And that syntax seems reasonable to me.
> It's about the same as the current syntax with no [[ ]], if I
> understand correctly.

If we seek interface compatibility with C, a function-like syntax with
a keyword or identifier and then plain old parenthesis is always the
easiest. C can then work around such things with macros that map such
a beast do whatever is convenient on the target platform.

C++ clearly has such kind of syntax already (e.g `throw`) and this
strategy has worked out well in the past, e.g in shared system
headers.

Thanks
Jₑₙₛ

-- 
:: INRIA Nancy Grand Est ::: Camus ::::::: ICube/ICPS :::
:: ::::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536   ::
:: :::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183   ::
:: ::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 ::
:: http://icube-icps.unistra.fr/index.php/Jens_Gustedt ::