wt., 10 lut 2026 o 11:33 Ville Voutilainen
<ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]> napisał(a):
>
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 at 11:56, Marcin Jaczewski via Std-Proposals
> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > False, I like how they are handled :P
> > Only problem is people try sove in things that they should not.
> >
> > First of all, non-ignorable attributes should be explicit and ilformed
> > even if the compiler does not know them even in C++11.
> > I suggested adding the prefix `!!` for one like this, this could be
> > any symbol that makes C++11 reject this code and make this feature
> > backward and forward compatible.
> > This will make a clear distinction between these two versions.
>
> Or perhaps use the prefix '='. Like we.. ..already do.

I recall that something like this was mentioned, but is it already
available, what paper add this?
And if yes then this whole discussion (about attributes) is a bit moot
as it solves all problems.