@property Incorrectly Implemented?

[Lodovico Giaretta via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 7 September 2016 at 09:34:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> There are certainly some operations that we could better 
> emulate with @property functions that currently don't work 
> without returning by ref (like ++ or -=), but something like 
> taking the address of the @property function simply isn't going 
> to work in most cases, and neither is passing by ref. 
> Basically, only stuff that can be lowered to calls to the 
> getter and setter @property functions is going to work.
>
> It's nice that we can have property syntax rather than having 
> to have functions that start with get and set, but it really 
> doesn't work to fully emulate variables.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

BTW, some time ago, in another thread [1] about properties, we 
ended up writing this wrapper [2], which does a pretty good job 
at simulating fields. In the original thread you can also find 
other variants of it.

[1] 
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/okmgnrhdoeciovrfjmaj@forum.dlang.org
[2] http://pastebin.com/38n0fEtF