Property discussion wrap-up

[Zach the Mystic]

Just for kicks I decided to rewrite std.array.front in the way my 
suggested syntax would define it. there are two overloads. With 
comments removed, the current code is:

//---- Code ----
@property ref T front(T)(T[] a)
if (!isNarrowString!(T[]) && !is(T[] == void[]))
{
     assert(a.length, "Attempting to fetch the front of an empty 
array of " ~
                      typeof(a[0]).stringof);
     return a[0];
}

@property dchar front(A)(A a) if (isNarrowString!A)
{
     assert(a.length, "Attempting to fetch the front of an empty 
array of " ~
                      typeof(a[0]).stringof);
     size_t i = 0;
     return decode(a, i);
}
//---- End -----

With what I am calling Highlander structs ("there can be only 
one"), it would look like this:

//---- Code ----
front struct
{
   ref T opGet(T)(T[] a)
   if (!isNarrowString!(T[]) && !is(T[] == void[]))
   {
       assert(a.length, "Attempting to fetch the front of an empty 
array of " ~
                        typeof(a[0]).stringof);
       return a[0];
   }

   dchar opGet(A)(A a) if (isNarrowString!A)
   {
       assert(a.length, "Attempting to fetch the front of an empty 
array of " ~
                        typeof(a[0]).stringof);
       size_t i = 0;
       return decode(a, i);
   }
}
//---- End -----

Three things stood out to me:
1. The identifier "front" only appears once now, prominently at 
the top of all the definitions.
2. Definitions of "front" cannot be scattered willy-nilly 
throughout the file anymore.
3. Without @property, the signatures are shorter, and the only 
price paid is the three extra lines it takes to wrap the whole 
thing with "front struct { ... }".

I don't think this is a bad exchange at all, considering you now 
have all the semantics of structs at your disposal for absolute 
total control over the look and feel of your properties.