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

[Dicebot]

On Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 23:34:59 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> In order to do that, it is necessary aware of the precise 
> definitions, or at least specifications, of referenced 
> declarations in any case. So by your definition, the current 
> function call syntax is "unambiguous".

Sure, it is for compiler. And it for me if I check the definition 
of symbol. But without going to some other source file and 
looking up definition there is no way to guess if this:
-----
auto ret = something.anything;
-----
..actually does anything else but reassigning a field to a 
variable. In my personal experience time lost to check such stuff 
out is much more than time saved by fast and convenient 
parens-less coding. Thus the attitude.