Make `& Class.foo` illegal

[sarn]

On Thursday, 27 August 2020 at 16:30:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> In C++, there's this construct called a member function 
> pointer, which has its own special type and requires the caller 
> to specify an object before the function can be called.  
> Arguably, that's what D should be implementing.

I don't know if you've seen them before, but these two articles 
explain the reasoning behind D not having member function 
pointers:
https://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/member-function-pointers-in-d/231600610
https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/7150/Member-Function-Pointers-and-the-Fastest-Possible

tl;dr: C++ member function pointers are complicated when you get 
into the details, and the sanest implementation is with thunks 
that are equivalent to lambdas or delegates.  Ironically, the 
most common usage of member function pointers turned out to be 
building complicated versions of lambdas and closures (at least 
before C++ got them built in).

None of that says anything about syntax, but it's why D doesn't 
have member function pointers, per se, like C++ does.