On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:58:41 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/24/13 3:45 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:51:32 -0500
Andrei Alexandrescu<[email protected]> wrote:
No, you merely came up with *some* specific cherry-picked examples that
sparked *some* debate (with most of the disagreing coming from
you).
I simply mentioned three reasons that came to mind.
Andrei
While I don't approve of Mr. Sabalausky's tone or attitude, the crux of
his argument is logically sound. The problem with @property isn't
@property, it's D's insistence on optional parens. If paren usage was
clearly defined then this would be a non-issue. I would like to point out
that I can't think of another systems/general purpose language that has an
calling syntax specification as vague and convoluted as D's. C#'s is
brutally simple. Java's is brutally simple. In C/C++ everything is a
function or field, so, brutally simple.
Make D's calling syntax simpler, end optional parens!
--
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
