Is there a way to enforce UFCS?

[thebluepandabear]

On Wednesday, 4 January 2023 at 14:21:46 UTC, bauss wrote:
> On Wednesday, 4 January 2023 at 03:42:28 UTC, thebluepandabear 
> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> My question is: is there a way to enforce UFCS-syntax?
>
> None of your code actually uses UFCS.
>
> This is UFCS:
>
> ```
> class Foo {
>   int bar;
> }
>
> void setBar(Foo foo, int value) {
>   foo.bar = value;
> }
>
> void main() {
>   foo.setBar(100); // UFCS
>   setBar(foo, 100); // Non-UFCS (Above expands to this)
> }
> ```
>
> This is not UFCS but just class method calling:
>
> ```
> class Foo {
>   int bar;
>
>   void setBar(Foo foo, int value) {
>     foo.bar = value;
>   }
> }
>
> void main() {
>   foo.setBar(100); // Not UFCS - just method call to the class
>   foo.setBar = 100; // Not UFCS - simply a setter function call 
> (equal to the above)
>   setBar(foo, 100); // Error
> }
> ```
>
> Also note that @property doesn't really do anything now and 
> there's even talk about deprecating it. Althought I personally 
> still use it, then it doesn't have much of a function and none 
> of your code is affected if you remove it.

Yeah I got mixed up.

I think a good use of `@property` is for code clarity, it makes 
it clear which parts of your code should be treated as properties.