On 2013-01-28 12:44, Robert wrote:
@property use:
I'd like to point out, that regardless of the "with parens/without
parens" stuff, marking properties with @property makes sense. So that
tools and frameworks can recognize them as such.
I completely agree. I have created a struct called "attribute" only to
be used as an attribute for other types that should only be attributes:
struct attribute {}
@attribute struct foo {}
Even though @attribute in this case doesn't to anything it shows the
intent clearly. Same thing why I like explicit interfaces and abstract
classes compared with C++.
This also implies that
fields that are meant as properties should be declared @property and the
compiler should generate getter/setter so it behaves exactly like a
manually created property. May I add this to DIP21?
Having the compiler lower the following:
@property int a;
to
private int __a;
@property int a() {
return __a;
}
@property int a(int new_a) {
__a=new_a;
return __a;
}
I would love that. But the setter should return void and the compiler
should to property rewrites.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
