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

[deadalnix]

On Friday, 25 January 2013 at 03:52:36 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 1/24/13 9:54 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:00:06 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu
>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/24/13 7:36 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Also non-logical special case rules like this make the 
>>>> language harder
>>>> to learn, therefore harder to evangelize.
>>>
>>> Definitely. But it shouldn't be forgotten that syntactic 
>>> warts are
>>> also a liability.
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>
>> I would argue that given how common they already are, cost of 
>> the wart
>> is far smaller than the benefit of not having the unique-to-D 
>> special
>> case that makes the language that much harder to learn.
>
> Again, the question needs asking: is it a given that we need to 
> allow optional parentheses? Otherwise we'll keep on rehashing 
> this over and over again.
>

It is NOT and workaround have been proposed to solve the UFCS () 
invasion case, which is probably the only one that don't boil 
down to lazyness when digging a little.