property API design

[DanielG]

I'm currently wrapping a C++ API, and there are implicit 
properties in the API surface (getter and setter), but the getter 
naming is inconsistent.

The setters are always `setProperty`, but getters can be:
   - `T someProperty()`
   - `bool isSomeProperty()`
   - `bool hasSomeProperty()`

In writing my D wrapper for this, I'm hesitant to hide the 
original API entirely - not least because I would prefer people 
can consult the C++ documentation to see what methods should be 
called, without having to read with a fine-tooth comb to figure 
out whether something is a property or not (and thus having to 
omit `is`/`has`/`set` prefixes).

Often a class will have a dozen `setXXX` methods - some of them 
properties, some not. Seems a bit cruel to make half of them 
disappear, because they're property setters (requiring `.XXX = 
value` syntax instead)

**So my question is this:** would the following be acceptable in 
my D bindings? Would this lead to any annoying/weird problems 
later on?

```d
     bool isSomeProperty() { ... }
     void setSomeProperty(bool value) { ... }
     @property alias someProperty = isSomeProperty;
     @property alias someProperty = setSomeProperty;
```

On the surface this seems like a nice way to make using the API 
less of a chore. Property syntax if you want it, identical C++ 
syntax if not.