Possible oversight with postfix "type" keyword?

[switch-blade-stuff]

I have a bit of a concern about the postfix type and namespace keywords, both about consistency and implementation caveats.

The main gist of my concern is that with postfix type keyword, a type's parents cannot be defined as they are in syntax 1, as column is being used for the keyword.

Of course it can be done via Java-style extends (or similar) keyword. Or via a second column after the type. But that just seems like introducing visual noise into the syntax for the sake of having a postfix keyword.

Another concern is how would template declarations and concept requirements work, would the template/requires keywords also come after the column like this?
my_type : template<typename T> requires (X) type
or like this
my_type : type template<typename T> requires (X)
This, at least to me, seems a bit noisy as well.

And finally - consistency: this way there will be prefix keywords (i.e. if, for, etc.), postfix keywords without a column (ex. noexcept) and postfix keywords with a column (type). This, again, seems to me like additional syntactical noise for the sake of "using the shiny postfix".

Are there any valid reasons for the postfix keywords for types/namespaces that i just dont see? How would inheritance, templates, etc. work with the postfix keywords?

[hsutter]

Good points, and I think most of your questions will be answered when I implement classes and namespaces.

Briefly for now, they will look something like this:

my_company: namespace = {

    my_type: <T: type is X> type = {
        // ...
    }

}

For more about is X please see P2392: Pattern matching using is and as such as section 2.1.2, and my CppCon 2021 talk about it.

[jcanizales]

Briefly for now, they will look something like this:

my_company: namespace = {

    my_type: <T: type is X> type = {
        // ...
    }

}

A comment about that proposed syntax is that, unless you're planning to ban adding names to the same namespace in different files (or in different sections of a same file), this would make it look like the whole namespace is being re-declared and replaced:

my_company: namespace = {
    type_1: type = {
        // ...
    }
}
// ...
my_company: namespace = {
    type_2: type = {
        // ...
    }
}