On Monday, April 23, 2012 02:40:42 Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 23:54:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > Well, strict enforcement is how @property was designed in the > > first place (and is how it's described in TDPL). > > That doesn't affect my argument at all, > > People actually use the implementation as it is, which > is a superset of the TDPL definition. > > Enforcing that definition breaks code and, if anything, > adds only minor maintenance benefits. > > It'd be easier to strike the word "must" from future > printings of the book than to fix all D code everywhere.
Well, I'm firmly in the camp of people who think that property is very broken if it's not strictly enforced and that the current laxity is horrible. I think that the breakage is _well_ worth the gain. Regardless, the current plan is that strict enforcement will become the normal behavior. - Jonathan M Davis