@property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?

[mist]

I am probably I minority here but I liked the most strict 
-property version and it made a lot of sense to me. Rationale is 
simple:
some().ufcs().chaining(); - this is just a minor syntax 
inconvenience
anything; - this drives me crazy, there is no way to understand 
if this a no-op statement variable of function call with some 
side-effect
I'd really like to have all function types to be obliged to use 
() and use property syntax only to those of property semantics 
(no side-effect variable getter/setter)

But looking at other comments this does not seem popular :( Well, 
I can only hope for something simple and non-revolutionary then.