Reddit: why aren't people using D?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>>>>> I think the only way you and Walter can understand what a property 
>>>>> is and what it is used for is to use for some time a language that 
>>>>> implements them. For example C#. Then you'll say "that's nice" and 
>>>>> would want to implement it in D.
>>>>
>>>> I totally agree that "that's nice". But it's just notational 
>>>> convenience, and there was no proof aired here to convince me 
>>>> otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>
>>> The ambiguity with a function returning a delegate? The debugger 
>>> support? Help UI designers with properties windows?
>>>
>>> If none of those convinced you, ok.
>>
>> Convince me of what? Of the fact that the current design has problems, 
>> absolutely. That we need to embark on all sorts of baroque notations 
>> for the sake of a convenience, not quite.
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> I agree. It's very hard to find the correct way to implement it... :(

Might be because (a) we aren't getting our priorities right, (b) we 
ascribe more to properties than what the compiler really makes of them.

At the end of the day, a property is a notational convenience. Instead 
of writing:

obj.set_xyz(5);
int a = obj.get_xyz();

properties allow us to write:

obj.xyz = 5;
int a = obj.xyz;

Just to be 100% clear, I agree that the convenience is great. But I 
don't know why the hell I need to learn a whole different syntax for 
*defining* such things, when the compiler itself doesn't give a damn - 
it just blindly rewrites the latter into something like the former.

Now to be 101% clear, I also understand that the current design sucks. 
But what I want is to come with a new design that adds minimum 
aggravation on the learning programmer. If they know how to define a 
method, they must know how to define a property. None of that property 
blah { get ... set ... } crap is necessary.


Andrei