hiding a class property behind a method

francesco cattoglio francesco.cattoglio at gmail.com
Sat Feb 22 15:31:09 PST 2014


On Saturday, 22 February 2014 at 22:42:24 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
> The problem isn't about optional parenthesis or properties. 
> It's the fact that
> you can redefine a symbol to be something entierly different, 
> and that this
> difference will only be seen if you are looking at the symbol 
> through the
> "correct" type.
You are right. I thought that if we had forced parenthesis, the 
compiler would at least be able to understand what symbol you 
were referring to, but this is actually not the case.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list