On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:18:26 -0400, Daniel Keep
<daniel.keep.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
So your answer is, there is no ambiguity because it's not possible to
access the getter/setter directly? That poses a problem for existing
code which uses delegates to such functions. I'm not sure we want to
lose that ability.
You can't trivially disambiguate between the getter and the setter with
the current system, either. How is this a new issue?
You can't *trivially* but you can do it (that's another issue that
probably should be addressed in general for overloaded functions). Aside
from Andrei's wrapper trick, you *can't* do it with the proposed property
syntax.
Besides which, why can't you just add this:
__traits(getter, aggregate.property)
Problem solved.
That works too. That's probably the most sensable solution I've seen.
Has my vote.
-Steve
