Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Andrei Alexandrescu" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
But what I want is to come with a new design that adds minimum aggravation
on the learning programmer. If they know how to define a method, they must
know how to define a property. None of that property blah { get ... set
... } crap is necessary.
I can't be nice about this: Any programmer who has *any* aggrivation
learning any even remotely sane property syntax is an idiot, period. They'd
have to be incompetent to not be able to look at an example like this:
// Fine, I'll throw DRY away:
int _width;
int width
{
get { return _width; }
set(v) { _width = v; }
}
And immediately know exactly how the poroperty syntax works.
Sure. My point is that with using standard method definition syntax
there's no need for even looking over an example.
Plus, damn near every other common language out there these days has some
form of property syntax (except maybe C++, but that's just a steaming pile
anyway, and anyone who can get used to that garbage is going to be among the
last people to hit stumbling blocks over a modern property syntax). So prior
experience with real property syntax is extremely common. Plus, none of the
people using those langauges have had trouble with these property syntaxes
anyway. It's a complete non-issue.
Java too I guess.
While we're at it, let's just throw away for and foreach, after all, there
can't possibly be any point to those if you already have while! Why should
we give people new to D the aggrivation of having to learn for and foreach
syntax?
Removing foreach would make code more verbose. Adding property crap
would make code more verbose.
Andrei
