Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I'd like to have an easy enough syntax for defining read-only properties
> (often in my code). With the proposed syntax, one writes
>
> bool empty { ... }
>
> and calls it a day, but with the elaborate getters and setters there are
> two scopes to get through:
>
> bool empty { auto get() { ... } }
>
> which is quite some aggravation.
The point is not really the grouping of elements within brackets. That just
eliminates some redundancy. It can also look like the following:
void empty.set(bool value) { ... }
bool empty.get() { ... }
and have the same meaning as my earlier example.
--
Michiel Helvensteijn
