On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:24:54 -0400, Daniel Keep
<[email protected]> wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
...
The only issue with this is if the type returned from the getter
actually defines a get field or method. While having a method called
get might be a likely possibility, having that on a type that is likely
to be returned as a property is probably unlikely. There is of course a
workaround:
...
-Steve
Or you could just use __traits and avoid having to invent increasingly
obtuse layers of syntax.
Yes. As I said elsewhere, this has my vote.
-Steve
