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

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-01-24 22:08, Adam Wilson wrote:

> 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!

There are many languages that allow optional parentheses when calling a 
function. Ruby, CoffeeScript and Groovy to mention a few.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg