While we're lynching features, how bout' them omittable parens?

[dsimcha]

== Quote from Chad J (chadjoan at __spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
> Lionello Lunesu wrote:
> >
> > "Chad J" <chadjoan at __spam.is.bad__gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:gut0f2$jc0$1 at digitalmars.com...
> >> Nevermind properties.  Any chance we can forbid the omittable
> >> parentheses, at least in the lhs of an assignment expression?
> >>
> >> In the more general case, any value type that gets modified but never
> >> read or copied elsewhere is probably either dead code, a bug, or a
> >> benchmark.  The latter is easy to fix by adding the necessary read/copy
> >> (return the value, pass it to a global or function, etc).  It'd be great
> >> if this kind of thing were a compile time error.
> >>
> >> Code like this shouldn't compile:
> >>
> >> struct S { int a = 0; }
> >> S foo() { S s; return s; }
> >>
> >> void main()
> >> {
> >>    foo.a++;
> >> }
> >
> > This is not because of the omittable parens. Even with added parens that
> > code should not compile!
> >
> > L.
> Agreed!

Yeah, file a Bugzilla.  Shouldn't ++, +=, etc. only work on lvalues?