On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:13:02 -0500, Zach the Mystic
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 15:40:19 UTC, Michel Fortin wrote:
And you have to admit that the way D does properties today is both
simple, clever, and appealing. It does have some error-prone
liabilities when it comes to callable types and generic programming
especially, but beside that I do like the design of the thing. It's a
natural extension of UFCS, even though it predates UFCS. Perhaps we
should just call it a day and live with the ambiguities. I don't like
it, but I don't see any viable alternative.
I'm hoping that the community won't close the books on this issue
without even *examining* my proposal, found here:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]?page=2#post-yqvrjszzlcpmmuyqyxdz:40forum.dlang.org
I looked at it, it seems extremely similar to C# properties, which has
been proposed before.
Not that there's anything wrong with it, I'm saying it's a duplicate of
what has been proposed. If it were to be an acceptable solution, I'd be
on board (though I don't know why we wouldn't use the same notation as C#
for familiarity).
Don't hold your breath waiting for Walter to respond though, he is
notoriously silent unless he completely disagrees with you.
-Steve
