Is the -property compiler flag broken/bad idea?

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Thursday, June 06, 2013 01:00:12 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 June 2013 at 22:31:15 UTC, Namespace wrote:
> > Sorry I don't get it. Are you for or against optional
> > parenthesis for function which are not marked with @property?
> 
> I'm for optional parens, but I'm also for @property, because the
> problems @property ought to be fixing are semantic, not syntax,
> and have no impact at all on non- at property functions.
> 
> The questions of @property and optional parens actually have
> nothing to do with each other, besides the unfortunate fact that
> they come up together in these threads and -property confuses the
> two. Optional parens is a feature of function call syntax.
> @property is about making a function look like a variable to the
> outside world, which means that function call syntax shouldn't
> apply to it anymore either way.

Which is essentially the position of weak property enforcement. Property 
functions must be used as properties, but non-property functions are free to 
be called without parens.

- Jonathan M Davis