Does objective-c parse the @identifier "keywords" inside of C++
attributes? could [[@function]] work like the proposed [[+annotation]]?

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 1:46 PM Herb Sutter via SG7 <sg7_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> > 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.
>
>
> --
> SG7 mailing list
> SG7_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg7
>

-- 
Garrett Fleenor
(They/Them or He/Him)