On Saturday, 2 February 2013 at 09:14:30 UTC, TommiT wrote:
I propose we just forget about the whole concept of a property,
and instead add to D a new construct called 'memberspace'.
Memberspace subdivides the 'space' in which the member
functions and operators of a type live into separately named
'subspaces', like namespaces do for freestanding functions and
classes in C++. Read more about the uses of this idea over
there (it's not my idea):
First impression: I don't know why but I don't like it.
It feels like you're doing the following:
1) Declare a struct and immediately instantiate it with the same
name. (Or union, or similar)
2) Only one declaration of this struct can exist, doesn't count
as nested struct.
3) Disable all constructors/postblit/opAssign except as follows
The only thing it has really done is allow you to force the use
of parenthesis during a call (but only the get, not the set).
You're then defining all opBinary/opAssign methods that it works
with which seems like it will end up bloating the code
considerably but not giving back as much as it takes to write it.
