On Thursday, 24 January 2013 at 13:56:03 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2013-01-24 14:41, deadalnix wrote:
3. @getter is an attribute. A function marked @getter is
automatically
executed : () is added automatically :
@getter void funName() {}
funName; // function get executed.
funName(); // Error, void is not callable.
4. @getter can be used as UFCS.
@getter void funName(T t) {}
T t; t.funName; // function gets executed.
funName(t); // Error, funName require 1 argument, 0 given.
5. @setter is an attribute. A setter method can *only* be used
in rhs of
an expression. The assigned value is used as argument.
@setter void funName(T t) {}
T t; funName = t; // function gets executed.
funName(t); // Error, funName must be used in an assign
expression.
6. @setter can as well be used as UFCS :
@getter void funName(T t, U u) {}
T t; U u; t.funName = u; // function gets executed.
t.funName(u); // Error, funName must be used in an assign
expression.
What about @property(getter) and @property(setter) instead?
Otherwise we need two new built-in attributes.
I don't really care about the syntax. If any new attribute has to
be added, they should be defined in some modules instead of
builtin.
8. method behave as functions :
class A { void foo() {} }
A a;
static assert(is(typeof(a.foo) : void delegate())); //
Pass.
&a.foo; // deprecated NOOP for compatibility.
a.foo(); // call a.foo
The address operator wouldn't be needed to get a delegate for a
method anymore?
No, which would eliminate the difference behavior between
function as variables and function defined in source code. This
is a big step forward for functional style.
