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

[Bernard Helyer]

On Thursday, 24 January 2013 at 08:35:01 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> This has turned into a monster. We've taken 2 or 3 wrong turns 
> somewhere.
>
> Perhaps we should revert to a simple set of rules.
>
> 1. Empty parens are optional. If there is an ambiguity with the 
> return value taking (), the () go on the return value.
>
> 2. the:
>    f = g
> rewrite to:
>    f(g)
> only happens if f is a function that only has overloads for () 
> and (one argument). No variadics.
>
> 3. Parens are required for calling delegates or function 
> pointers.
>
> 4. No more @property.

This is lazy design, plain and simple. You say it's turned into
a monster, but @property, at its core, is simpler than the 
heuristics
you've demonstrated here. To my mind, @property, properly 
implemented
is simple:

@property functions may be called with no parens or with 
assignment as
the singular argument. Non @property functions may not.

There. No complications. The only complications come from D's 
history.
And then you want to turn it back? This seems a terrible idea -- 
the
deed is done, pull the trigger. Make @property mandatory for 
property
functions.


-Bernard.