Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:29:22 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:21:28 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:

How is f.byLine clearer and less ambiguous than f.byLine()? Or vice versa for that matter?
 Note that properties can be named things other than byLine.
 -Steve

What I meant to say is that in the @property landscape the following two conventions become suddenly attractive:

* Do not use @property at all

* Use @property for all nullary functions

And they're bound to save a lot of time to everyone involved.


I think we all agree that setters the way D1 does them are very prone to abuse. So all that is left is no-argument functions.

There are other alternative conventions to what you stated. This is my convention:

* use @property where the main purpose of the function is to fetch a value (computed or not, modifying the container or not)

Consider:

struct Stack(T) {
    T pop();
    ...
}

By your definition, pop() should be a property. It doesn't quite strike me as an intuitive decision.

Andrei

Reply via email to