DIP23 draft: Fixing properties redux

[TommiT]

On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 02:36:41 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 03:23 AM, kenji hara wrote:
>> Unfortunately, I can present a counterexample.
>>
>> struct S {
>>     static int value;
>>     static @property int foo() { return value; }
>>     static @property void foo(int n) { value = n; }
>>
>> }
>> void main() {
>>     int n = S.foo;
>>     S.foo = 1;
>> }
>>
>> Should they be disallowed, as like module level properties?
>>
>> Kenji Hara
>
> Probably. (static essentially means module-level, but in a 
> potentially nested name space.)

I disagree. Static properties can be allowed because they're not 
ambiguous. The problem with module-level:
@property void foo(int n) {}
...are the two interpretations of foo as either a setter taking 
an int or a getter property of int type. So, one of those 
interpretations must be disallowed. But, with static member 
properties, there aren't multiple interpretations.