DIP23 draft: Fixing properties redux

[David Nadlinger]

On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 01:30:49 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> I think most, if not all, detailed rules derive from these.

One does not, the strange special case for taking the address of 
a property.

I'd REALLY urge you to explore alternative solutions, such as the 
one proposed by Andrej, before introducing an abomination like 
distinguishing between "&a" and "&(a)".

There is no way such strange behavior could be explained in a way 
that is coherent with the rest of the language.

I found that when you are working on a complex problem and have a 
solution that seems to work for everything except a little 
detail, the best approach often is to step back a bit and have an 
entirely fresh look at that area again, but now taking the rest 
of your design as a given.

Introducing a rule by which parenthesizing an expression in a way 
that does not change precedence suddenly causes a difference in 
behavior certainly wouldn't be among the first ideas coming to my 
mind this way.

David