http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7176
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> 2012-07-20 10:06:53 PDT --- > Yes, or, quite often I want to write a trivial getter but a nontrivial setter. > So I'd like just the getter for free. Also, when the interface is going to be > exported, even a trivial property should often be a property instead of a > field, to avoid breaking binary compatibility if one changes one's mind and > wants to make it a property later (actually this even affects source > compatibility--a property can't be passed by reference). That's why I've been tempted to suggest that @property on a variable made it so that only operations which would still be legal if it were switched to being a property function were allowed. I can't remember whether I ever actually opened an enhancement request on that though. I'd have to go digging to find out. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------