> FWIW, I like the `class(things...)` syntax. It doesn't require innovation, is

> straightforward, and free of obstacles.

 

Thanks! Re obstacles: As Bengt asked, how would you generalize it to functions? That's the part I'm having trouble seeing a clear path about, unless we add something like `function(things...)` before every function which seems cumbersome. That is,

 

               // these are consistent

               @interface class IFoo { ... };

               @pure double f(double, double) { ... }

 

vs (I can live with)

 

               // these are consistent with

               class(interface) IFoo { ... };

               function(pure) double f(double, double) { ... }

 

The #1 most important thing to me is that we design for consistency and generality.

 

As we do that, my #2 hope is that we please keep the function cases in mind for (future) first-class treatment. We will need to expand reflection and generation to everything, including functions and statements and expressions (and variables, and possibly namespaces, aliases, …). Not all of those start with a clear keyword like class types do.