Am Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:51:32 -0500 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]>: > > No. The complications come from the fact that (a) nobody could agree > what should be a @property and what shouldn't;
There are only 2 kinds of programmers: Those who read the C# guidelines for properties and those who didn't. Seriously, I never found it difficult to decide if something should be a property, the C#/.NET folks have pretty clear rules. > (b) @property adds > noise for everybody for the sake of a corner case (functions > returning delegates); Partially true, although the real question is whether the additional () are really noise or actually useful. A hardcore C programmer (wants to see every function call) and a ruby developer could probably have a long discussion about that. >(c) the @property discipline failed to align > itself in any way with better code quality. It's hard to verify if code quality changed if the feature isn't properly implemented. Even if it was properly implemented comparing code quality probably isn't easy.
