the other part of my post was about UFCS syntax for mixin: eg: foo.mixin.writeln
is there any reason not to allow it? On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com>wrote: > On 9/3/13, Jacob Carlborg <d...@me.com> wrote: > > With properties you never know if you're invoking a method or accessing > > a field: > > > > foo.data; // call method or access field? > > Yeah but it does something with data on its own side. If this becomes > an implicit mixin, it could do something with code at the call site. > E.g. > > auto st = getSecurityToken(...); > updateGui(); // what if this becomes a mixin and ends up reading 'st' > and displaying it on the screen? > > It is equivalent to using globals everywhere in your codebase. >
