Jonathan M Davis Wrote:
> Except that @property is for _functions_. You mark a function with @property
> so
> that it _acts_ like a variable. @property on a variable is _meaningless_. It
> would be like marking a variable nothrow. It makes no sense. Neither should
> be
> legal. The fact that a member variable is public makes it a property.
> @property
> on a member variable makes no sense.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
class Foo {
@property {
int min;
int hour() { return _hour;}
...
}
}
I agree that useless markings should usually be disallowed, but for me there is
visual cues that @property provides and if I'm declaring a number of public
fields/functions I'd want the present them in a similar manner.
