Re: Attributes on structs

["Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>]

On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, Mark Mitchell wrote:

> Jason Merrill wrote:
> 
> > One solution to this issue would be to simply disallow attributes on
> > structs after the definition.  Failing that, we need to define how they
> > interact with the type system.  Opinions?
> 
> We had a discussion about this a while back:
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00318.html
> 
> Roughly speaking, it seemed like my proposal was approximately
> acceptable to those who commented -- except that it seemed that it
> actually allowed a bit more than we need to do so.  In particular, my
> reading of that thread is that people seemd to agree we could simply
> disallow attributes after the definition, which is fine by me.

There's an additional issue to deal with now: proposals to include some 
form of attributes in C++0x and C1x and any semantics those may define.  
None of the proposals I've seen seem to do much about addressing the type 
system issues.  I critiqued incompatibilities in one proposal in WG14 
N1259.  WG21 N2466 (a document arising from the WG14 Kona meeting that I 
presume will appear in the WG14 post-Kona mailing as well as the WG21 one) 
gives some WG14 views from Kona but doesn't seem to address type system 
issues.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com