@property needed or not needed?

[deadalnix]

On Tuesday, 20 November 2012 at 13:35:14 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 November 2012 at 06:06:21 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> I'm not sure how it fit in the DIP but &funName is ambiguous 
>> when funName return a reference.
>
> We can just define this away: &funName if it isn't a @property 
> is the address of the function.
>

So this is impossible to get the address of the returned
reference.

> If it is a @property, ALL operations work on the return value, 
> so it is rewritten as &(funName()).

I agree that this is ho it should work.