Property discussion wrap-up

[Dicebot]

On Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 16:50:47 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> Off topic rant.
>
> I suppressed a counterexample in the section Optional 
> parentheses
>  - Extra note .
>
> The note state that some stuff are valid for *function* and the 
> counter example showed ambiguity using opCall. I don't know who 
> did this and I don't care. I however can't stand intellectual 
> dishonesty.

It was me, sorry if I have offended you. I tend to read 
"function" as "callable" if not mentioned otherwise and thus was 
wandering how note refers to this case. This left counter-example 
in hope that someone will comment it.

Now I see that it should be better suited to discussion, but at 
that time it was just curiosity, not desire to prove anything.