Future of memory management in D

[Dom DiSc]

On Friday, 19 November 2021 at 11:14:46 UTC, Dom DiSc wrote:
> prop += 5;
>
> is automatically lowered to
>
> prop(prop() + 5); // function style

And btw. taking the address of a property (the whole point why 
this feature was abandoned which would otherwise be very easy to 
implement) should simply be forbidden also.
What should that be anyway? The address of the getter? Or that of 
the setter? Or that of the private member (that may not even 
exist)?!?
Properties simulate a value but protect it by allowing only 
specific operations on it (either get or set or both, but maybe 
with complicated processing of the assigned value).
Why should it allow such an immersive operation as taking its 
address?!?

If at all, we may allow for a third property function, that 
simulates an address of a value - but I can't think of a valid 
usecase for such a thing... through the address you can do 
everything to the simulated object, so why not making it public 
in the first place?