* Sawyer X <xsawyerx@gmail.com> [2018-01-13T05:13:15] > Here is where I am at this point: > > * We could not come up with a satisfying change to signatures to fully > disambiguate it from prototypes. This means we will result to only be > able to use signatures under "use feature" or "use VERSION". Not fun but > at least it's consistent and provides syntax people are happy with. I always assumed that signatures would end up living in a versioned bundled. > * The only way to support prototypes that affect signature compilation > (such as lvalue prototype) is by allowing prototypes on both sides. I do > not find the ability to put signatures before prototypes a compelling > enough reason for the work requires to support prototypes on both sides. > I also think it would create inconsistencies where some code would be > written with prototypes after and some with prototypes prior. Instead, I > think we will resolve to moving signatures again to be after prototypes. Do you mean "moving signatures again to be after attributes"? -- rjbsThread Previous | Thread Next