DIP23 draft: Fixing properties redux

[Zach the Mystic]

On Tuesday, 5 February 2013 at 21:59:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> Just to make sure: this is about 
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ririagrqecshjljcdubd@forum.dlang.org.
>
> Language design is a subjective topic. With time I have learned 
> it's best to not comment very much about it. I have created 
> dozens, maybe hundreds of tidbits of language design and 
> invariably I believe they had obvious merits and negligible 
> drawbacks. The confidence in the quality of my own language 
> designs has decayed exponentially over the years.
>
> I'm telling this to put in perspective my following comment. I 
> think it's awesome that work like yours is discussed and 
> refined in this group. At the same time my opinion is that the 
> design is not appropriate for us. It changes semantics of 
> existing code and fosters a cross-talk between subcomponents 
> that has not been time tested. It is complicated in 
> implementation for a benefit that's not properly motivated. At 
> the top level it solves the wrong problem. As stated: "The 
> challenge is to do better, both in terms of functionality and 
> in terms of syntax, than his proposal: ..." The actual 
> challenge is to make properties work with maximum backward 
> compatibility, minimal surprise, best integration with the rest 
> of the language, and maximum of benefits.
>
>
> Andrei

Okay. But I just want to be clear that you are saying what I am 
reading, which is that I came to this language too late to really 
make a difference in it.