Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > Bill Baxter wrote: > > Yeh, I don't understand how any of this has anything to do with > > properties. It's the same question if you ask what should > > > > a.b().c = 5 > > > > do. It's the same issue whether you have properties or not, and > > needs a solution whether you have properties or not. > > Well the problem is that a.b().c = 5 makes it clear that there's a > function call in the mix, so the field-like behavior is not necessarily > to be expected.
This is a matter of coding style I believe. widget.clientRectangle.width=10; widget.getRectangle(Rects.clientRectangle).width=10; Should the meaning of this code change depending on whether the return value is reference type or value type? Looks like C# rules forbid implementation of smart pointers and structs are supposed to be simply composite types rather than generic value types.
