Possible @property compromise

[deadalnix]

On Wednesday, 30 January 2013 at 04:57:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips 
wrote:
> I don't agree with the argument that properties provide a 
> convince to identify low overhead access. While I'm not 
> experienced in this area, profile code should indicate where 
> performance is poor, it would be bad to assume "that looks like 
> a field, so it must not be where the performance is bad."
>

Yes, this is true, like always. Even when property isn't involved.

Fectching memory that isn't in cache anymore is typically 200-250 
CPU cycles on modern x86 architecture. Getting that from a 
register is immediate. Accessing a variable has unknown cost, and 
only profile can reveal the truth here.

Considering that property/function have some importance in regard 
of performance is in complete contradiction with how computer and 
code actually work now.

The difference is semantic. In case of property, you think data, 
in case of function, you think action.