On 22 apr 2011, at 00:28, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > Actually, setters _should_ return void. The chaining should be done by > calling > both the getter and setter functions. The other options is a property > function > which takes nothing but returns a ref. In either case, the chaining would > work.
Wouldn't this require some form of property rewriting? -- /Jacob Carlborg _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
