Fixing const arrays

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Tuesday, December 13, 2011 14:02:51 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 12/13/11 10:32 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Monday, December 12, 2011 18:00:35 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >> On 12/12/11 1:12 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >>> On Monday, December 12, 2011 08:46:18 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >>>> Insisting on the current property semantics was a sizeable mistake
> >>>> of
> >>>> this community, and I am sorry we gave into it.
> >>> 
> >>> Aside from the fact that the behavior of -property isn't the
> >>> default,
> >>> what's the problem with @property?
> >> 
> >> Other than it being completely useless, requiring more rote
> >> memorization, and fomenting time-wasting discussion? None.
> > 
> > So, you prefer the situation where any function with no arguments can be
> > used as a getter and any function with a single argument can be used as
> > a setter?
> No. That would be a false choice.

I'm not saying that those are the only choices, but you seem to think that the 
current situation is worse than what we had before, which I don't understand. 
The current situation looks all around better to me.

- Jonathan M Davis