Daniel Keep, el 27 de julio a las 01:09 me escribiste: > > > Leandro Lucarella wrote: > > Nick Sabalausky, el 24 de julio a las 00:39 me escribiste: > >> An alternate usage/definition syntax for properties. > >> > >> http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP4 > >> > >> Note that there are a few parts marked NEED HELP, that could use > >> assistance > >> from someone with more expertise in this than me. > > > > After reading all the threads again, I think the best proposal is the > > opGet_foo() / opSet_foo() for diferentiating functions and properties. > > I think is the more D-ish solution. > > > > I don't like the "_name" though, because it adds semantic infomation to > > the identifier, maybe a more template-like syntax can be used: > > That would involve changing template syntax to allow for identifiers to > be passed as an argument. > > Besides, templates can't be used as virtual methods, so they can't be > overridden and can't appear in interfaces.
Syntax don't have to be changed, unless templates are not allowed (syntactically) in interfaces (I'm too lazy to check right now :). And template syntax don't have to change either. This is already valid AFAIK syntax AFAIK. What it has to be changed, is the semantics, because int opGet(foo)(); should be interpreted as a read property instead of a templated function. > > ... > > > > I used an example without trivial properties because... well, you just use > > member variables for that. That's why I don't see real value in adding > > default properties getter/setters. > > interface I > { > int opGet_value(); > } > > You cannot use fields in an interface. Yes, and...? -- Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is no such thing as right or wrong Only consequences