@property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?

[mist]

On Friday, 25 January 2013 at 13:52:37 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2013-01-25 14:26, mist wrote:
>
>> Hm, shouldn't it be processed like that:
>> 1) evaluate "f = 3", setter called
>> 2) evaluate "(f = 3)" -> evaluate "f" -> getter called
>> 3) evaluate "auto i = ", setter called
>> ?
>
> Yes, but why would a setter be called at step 3?

Was thinking about i setter, did not pay attention it is actually 
a new declaration :) Never mind.