On Friday, January 25, 2013 07:14:29 deadalnix wrote: > On Friday, 25 January 2013 at 05:51:44 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Well, better that then get rid of @property. The other big > > question is what to > > do with opDispatch, since unless we add the ability to overload > > on @property > > with opDispatch, then it can't work with both properties and > > non-property > > functions. Maybe opPropDispatch or somesuch could be introduced > > to solve that > > particular problem. > > Can you explain the problem you see with opDispatch ?
If you make opDispatch @property, then you can't use it with normal functions, and if you don't make it @property, then it can't be used with property functions. And you can't overload on @property, so opDispatch is pretty much screwed with regards to properties at this point. It's certainly fixable, but there will need to be a (small) change in the language to do so. - Jonathan M Davis
