@property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?
Andrei Alexandrescu
SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Thu Jan 24 09:56:15 PST 2013
On 1/24/13 8:38 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 24 January 2013 08:34, Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com
> <mailto:newshound2 at digitalmars.com>> 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.
>
>
>
> As much as I want to agree, I also feel this comes as too little, too
> late to come to this conclusion now.
Too little is a good thing actually!
Andrei
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list