Re: @property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-01-26 22:48, Artur Skawina wrote:

Hmm, the current state of them being defined by two separate functions really
isn't ideal. But introducing new keywords or magic identifiers just for this
does not seem right.

    class A
    {
        private int i;
        int foo {
            out { return i; }
            in(int v) { i = v; }
        }
    }

or

    class A
    {
        private int i;
        @property foo {
            int out { return i; }
            in(int v) { i = v; }
        }
    }

That might conflict with contracts, which also uses "in" and "out".

--
/Jacob Carlborg