On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:49:35 -0500, Zach the Mystic
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 01:26:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
The compromise is: OK, you want to ditch @property? I can live with
that as long as we have some way to designate properties. How about
this?
It's only natural that a person wants to advocate for his or her own
proposal. That having been said, can I interest you in mine? :-)
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]?page=2#post-yqvrjszzlcpmmuyqyxdz:40forum.dlang.org
That a long link. Here's a shorter one if it doesn't work (my experience
with these forums is limited, sometimes the line gets truncated wrongly):
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]?page=2
If it fails to solve any of your problems, perhaps you could tell me how
or why. It is necessary to read the whole discussion to get insight on
how the proposal is developing. Also note that the top proposal is not
directly related to the @property discussion, so you have to skip down a
few lines to get to the property part.
What you describe is almost exactly something I suggested when the
original @property debate occurred. It's actually a version of C#'s
properties but with multiple get/set functions.
Can't find it right now, but I found several suggestions of that type. I
even found a few that propose exactly what I have!
It actually is a bit depressing, we have to reset the clock back to late
2009 to start over with properties...
-Steve
