Fixing D's Properties

[Chad J]

Daniel Keep wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> I emphatically agree that *something* needs to be done to address the
> shortcomings of properties in D.  I mean, what's the point of having
> increment/decrement and the op= operators if you cannot use them in a
> large number of places?
> 
> I do have to say that I'm not a big fan of the symbol-based syntax.
> Also, the inout system seems a bit... off.  The problem I have with it
> is that *both* the getter and setter are marked inout, which doesn't
> make a lot of sense.
> 
> Another possibility is to use contract-style notation:
> 
> int foo
> {
>     in(int baz) { bar = baz; }
>     out() { return bar; }
> }
> 
> Or even just dropping "inout" and using "in" and "out" explicitly:
> 
> in void foo(int baz) { bar = baz; }
> out int foo() { return bar; }
> 

Looks like it will work, and is fine by me.

> On another note, I think you should expand on exactly how different
> kinds of statements should be rewritten.  For instance, you haven't
> clarified what happens here:
> 
> w.rect.x = 10;
> 
> 	-- Daniel