@property needed or not needed?

[Regan Heath]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 16:49:22 -0000, Rob T <rob at ucora.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 4 December 2012 at 21:58:49 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
>> Exact costs, yes.  But syntactic properties can, and have historically  
>> also given a good indication of costs and this is useful.  Removing  
>> that, is less than useful and potentially surprising.
>>
>> Compare that to what you gain from this change.. nothing useful that I  
>> can see.
>>
>> Making variable assignments and function calls look the same buys you  
>> nothing, you're trying to make apples and oranges look like oranges and  
>> hide all the nice, useful, detail and distinction you get from having  
>> both assignments (oranges) and function calls (apples) and all that  
>> they imply.
>>
>> R
>
> You can make functions and vars look different through a naming  
> convention, and do even more if you choose. The enforcement of the empty  
> () as essentially an enforced naming convention.

Yes!

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/