Beta D 2.069.0-b1

[Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 01:27:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> Regardless, what we pretty much need to do with @property at 
> some point is make is that it's used to make it so that a 
> single pair of parens operate on the return value rather than 
> the function even if we don't do anything else with @property

Right, ideally a @proptery function can perfectly replace a 
variable, but practically calling the return value seems far 
fetched.
What would you use that for, a handwritten interface struct with 
function pointers made read-only using @property?

To me the whole property discussion looks like one of those 
endless debates about an insignificant detail.
Scala and Ruby seem to do well with sloppy parens.
With the introduction of UFCS it became clear that nobody likes 
byLine().array().sort().release(), and even less 
rng.release.sort().array().front.
For some functions it's really hard to decide whether or not 
something is a property, e.g. for me Range.save is an 
action/function not a property. So for me using @property appears 
to waste time making pointless decisions.