Robert Fraser Wrote: > Dimitar Kolev wrote: > > Steven Schveighoffer Wrote: > > > >> I don't see what advantages this has over other proposals. What is wrong > >> with a.a such that we have to resort to a#a? > >> > >> -Steve > >> > > > > People are crying over compilers not know which is a property and which is > > not. > > Actually, one of the major "features" of properties is that any field > can be changed into a property without any changes to existing code. > > If you're looking for an unused symbol, @ is likely a better choice than #.
I do not care what symbol it is as long as it is not used before and that you can spot it from a distance. When you see a.a = 3 and a...@a = 3 you immediately know which is what without having to look for the definition of a in the class hierarchy. Walter did this already with the templates !(. You can mistake a!(a) with a(!a) but who cares. !( is still understandable enough. Way better than the unambiguous <>.
