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

[Adam Wilson]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:58:41 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

> On 1/24/13 3:45 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:51:32 -0500
>> Andrei Alexandrescu<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org>  wrote:
>> No, you merely came up with *some* specific cherry-picked examples that
>> sparked *some* debate (with most of the disagreing coming from
>> you).
>
> I simply mentioned three reasons that came to mind.
>
> Andrei

While I don't approve of Mr. Sabalausky's tone or attitude, the crux of  
his argument is logically sound. The problem with @property isn't  
@property, it's D's insistence on optional parens. If paren usage was  
clearly defined then this would be a non-issue. I would like to point out  
that I can't think of another systems/general purpose language that has an  
calling syntax specification as vague and convoluted as D's. C#'s is  
brutally simple. Java's is brutally simple. In C/C++ everything is a  
function or field, so, brutally simple.

Make D's calling syntax simpler, end optional parens!

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/