@property for simple methods?

[Vladimirs Nordholm]

On Monday, 2 April 2018 at 14:20:49 UTC, Dennis wrote:
> On Monday, 2 April 2018 at 13:57:14 UTC, Vladimirs Nordholm 
> wrote:
>> Is there any reason for me to add the @property tags for the 
>> method?
>
> A list of things the @property tag does can be found here:
> https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#property-functions
>
> This behavior is particularly useful for generic code:
> "For the expression typeof(exp) where exp is an @property 
> function, the type is the return type of the function, rather 
> than the type of the function."
>
> Before I knew about this, I wrote this template to get the type 
> of 'field', because typeof(field) would return 'int()' instead 
> of 'int' when it was a getter function without @property.
>
> ```
> template ReturnOrValueType(type)
> {
> 	static if (isSomeFunction!(type.field)) {
> 		alias ReturnOrValueType = ReturnType!(typeof(type.field));
> 	}
> 	else {
> 		alias ReturnOrValueType = typeof(type.field);
> 	}
> }
> ```

Ah! First time I read the docs I didn't understand the 
typeof(exp) explanation, but yours made me understand that part.

Do you think I should I omit the @property tag, if the only 
wanted behaviour is to set a value (`foo.bar = "baz";`) ?