[bitc-dev] FN keyword
Jonathan S. Shapiro
shap at eros-os.org
Wed Aug 11 22:38:10 PDT 2010
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Ben Kloosterman <bklooste at gmail.com> wrote:
> The issue with an attribute is everyone immediately preferred this at the
> call site which looks pretty awkward for attributes eg
> 1) Why does the writer of the caller need to know , shouldn’t the
> compiler be able to work that out .
> 2) Some of these attributes get pretty big ( eg serialization , IOC
That's one issue. Another issue is that attributes can't be inferred,
because the compiler does not (in general) know anything about their
But worse than this: when attributes are used to encode type, we need a way
to attach them to types and print them accordingly. In C#, an attribute
cannot be introduced at a type, only at a type definition. The way you work
around this is by introducing and using a typedef. The associated
information is lost for pretty-printing purposes, exactly because it
> Im not qualified to give an answer.. but I can observe that its very
> annoying in C# ( the black magic we discussed ) of having stack created
> value types , then passing them by ref and out and the system occasionally
> boxing them eg to do a vcall on an interface or because there is a reference
> from the heap.
Concur, but that issue is entirely orthogonal to the issues and limitations
of attributes in CLR. Good topic, but not the same topic.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bitc-dev