property / getProperty() / setProperty()

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu escribió:
>> bearophile wrote:
>>> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>>>> Thanks. So it looks like get_property() and set_property() could 
>>>> fly. How does that sound?
>>>
>>> Not too much good. Among the simpler solutions there's the 'property' 
>>> attribute, that while not helping in reducing code (it makes code 
>>> longer!) solves most problems, while being simple. It's the minimal 
>>> solution that I think will work/fly.
>>
>> We can't throw keywords at problems like they're getting out of style. 
> 
> Hey! Let's introduce pure functions --> the new "pure" keyword was added.
> 
> Hey! Let's introduce functions that don't throw --> the new "nothrow" 
> keyword was added.
> 
> Hey! Let's introduce thread local storage --> "shared" and "__gshared" 
> keyword added.
> 
> Hey! Let's introduce... annotations and stop adding keywords for every 
> new feature.

For the record, I didn't like most of these.

Andrei