On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 20:27:41 Timon Gehr wrote: > On 01/17/2012 07:55 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 19:38:47 Timon Gehr wrote: > >> IMO it does not matter. I think we should just deprecate the -property > >> switch instead of engaging into that kind of fruitless discussion > >> every > >> now and then. ;) > > > > Then we might as well throw out @property and change TDPL. There's no > > point to @property without enforcement. I think that that ship has > > pretty much sailed already. > > > > - Jonathan M Davis > > Since -property is optional I think the relevant ships are still in the > haven.
@property is in TDPL. It's definitely the plan to implement it as described in TDPL, integrating -property into the compiler so that @property is _always_ enforced. It's just not that way, because it's on the list of things that's not fully implemented, and we needed a migration path from no @property enforcement to enforcement. You would need to come up with some really solid arguments why it should be thrown out (and what we should do instead) and get both Walter and Andrei (if not the community at large) to agree that they not only prefer your proposal but that it's worth the issues that the changes are going to cause at this stage. - Jonathan M Davis
