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

[deadalnix]

On Friday, 25 January 2013 at 02:24:06 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 1/24/13 9:11 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> I believe that that's what we have now. The problem is when 
>> you want a
>> property which returns a delegate. And for that, we need 
>> @property. Getting
>> rid of @property makes it a problem, whereas with @property, 
>> it can work - as
>> can property functions which return delegates.
>
> Well how about we just renounce those for the sake of 
> simplification.
>

I don't understand. We want to drop feature that work in other 
languages and bring benefit, but it is actually impossible to 
drop a feature that bring many ambiguities for a small syntactic 
sugar ?