On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 02:31:51 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
That's what I meant, weird use-case, at best it's a callback
I've never written such code, but even if you would, the 2
pairs of parens are only a tiny problem for generic code,
nothing to warrant the invasive language feature @property is.
I don't know how much metaprogramming-heavy generic code you've
written, but I can say from first-hand experience that there is
such a thing as Hell, and it is called Optional Parens.
Jokes aside, I've finally fixed (read: worked around using awful
hacks) a bug where the compiler was complaining about either
"Type.memberFunction is not callable with arguments ()" or "Need
'this' for Type.memberFunction". I love optional parens in
regular code, especially range-based code (doesn't everybody?),
but I desperately want a way to ensure that the symbol that I'm
trying to pass to a template function won't be interpreted as a
function call instead.