Daniel de Kok wrote: > With no intention to flame, but I never quite understood why people are > so keen on properties over getter/setter member functions. What > advantage does it have over obscuring direct member access and indirect > member access?
This 'obscuring' is exactly what makes properties a bit more attractive. There are a lots of extra little niceties, but I forgot them all (after a two day course on .NET :) ). But, in the end, properties *are* getter/setter pairs. > I think that the D approach is good enough, since it does not add > complexity for library designers. > > -- Daniel The D approach is a little more pleasant to write imho, but it's not good enough. You can't write 'foo.bar += n' if bar is a property in D and make that work. Imho, if you can't do that, it doesn't behave like a property, it isn't really a property.