Possible @property compromise

[Zach the Mystic]

On Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 15:40:19 UTC, Michel Fortin wrote:
> On 2013-01-31 14:50:40 +0000, "Steven Schveighoffer" 
> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> said:
>
>> It actually is a bit depressing, we have to reset the clock 
>> back to late  2009 to start over with properties...
>
> I haven't participated in the discussions about properties this 
> time around because it's pretty obvious to me it's getting 
> nowhere.
>
> It seems to me that nothing can be done at this point in time 
> if we want to avoid a breakage of almost all current D code.

Also if you're worried about the code breakage necessary  to get 
properties as structs, i.e. nested structs must now have "static" 
in front of them, consider:

1) That having structs which are nested inside functions hold a 
pointer without having structs nested in structs do the same 
thing is an inconsistent language feature.

2) Second, that such struct will still work in all cases where an 
outer name is not being shadowed. They will simply suffer 
performance costs of having a needless pointer attached.

Also, is it really asking people too much to tag nested structs 
with "static" now?