Revised RFC on range design for D2

[Sergey Gromov]

In article <gbgpak$2q10$1 at digitalmars.com>, 
brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail says...
> Also, some more on important bike shed issues:
>      for (; !src.done; src.next)
>      {
>          tgt.put(src.head);
>      }
> 
> As a matter of coding style conventions, I would say that using the 
> implicit property function call feature on a function that changes state 
> is *bad* style, and surely hope the community would agree on that.
> So "src.next" would be must better as "src.next()" as "src.next" really 
> just makes me cringe.

I think that property function call feature in general adds an 
unnecessary ambiguity to the language.  I'd prefer functions to be 
callable only with regular function call syntax, and properties be 
usable only with member access syntax.  The same stands for 'unified 
function call' feature: if you want to inject a method into an 'array of 
chars' class you do so explicitly, and only the member call syntax is 
allowed on that method.  Otherwise code tends to become ambiguous and 
unreadable.