Make dur a property?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/23/13 1:48 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> Having the *caller* decide whether something is a property or not makes
> as much sense as having the caller decide the function's name,
> signature and semantics.

No. The caller does get to decide a variety of syntactic aspects of the 
invocation.

> If anything, that's an issue with template syntax, it has nothing to do
> with properties, let alone the beloved practice of abusing properties
> for the sake of things that clearly are not properties.

The implied assumption here is that if it doesn't have parens it's a 
property. Well it's a function call.


Andrei