On Saturday, 9 February 2013 at 09:45:25 UTC, Robert wrote:
I am claiming that if we restrict ourselves to the property
concept
explained in the DIP, then the range API would no longer depend
on front
being a property, it can also be a function returning ref,
which is
perfectly legal for UFCS.
I am further claiming that properties via get/set methods don't
actually
make sense outside of the entity that define them, I am glad if
you
could give an actual example that would prove me wrong.
And because properties are treated (apart from allowing = to
call the
set method) exactly like normal functions, you should note no
difference.
It feels to me, that most problems arise due to the fact that
we try to
make properties like fields (forbidding parentheses), which
make them
essentially incompatible to functions, resulting in making all
sorts of
things properties, which actually aren't, just so that no
template
breaks.
That was painful to read. Can you please answer AFTER what you
quote ? Also, you don't address most of the point Jonathan
raises, and that should probably be a sign that you are not
mastering the topic enough.
