On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote: > Bill Baxter wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu >> <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote: >>> >>> Michiel Helvensteijn wrote: >>>> >>>> Bill Baxter wrote: >>>> >>>>>> byLine() is a function. It changes the state of stdin. Calling it >>>>>> consecutively will in general result in different return values. If >>>>>> there >>>>>> were two guys: stdin.currentLine (property) and stdin.nextLine(), it >>>>>> would be a different story. >>>>> >>>>> That's not how it works, I think. >>>>> Just calling byLine() by itself only returns a range struct. >>>>> Consuming things from that range is what changes the state of stdin. >>>> >>>> Ah, my bad. I was guessing. Still, returning a handle from a property >>>> that >>>> can change the state of the originating object is.. iffy. >>> >>> I agree. So where's the consensus? Things seemed so clear when people >>> were >>> beaten with @property over their head. >> >> I really don't see what the problem is there. >> You are arguing that car.wheels should not be a property simply >> because it would let me change the color of the wheels (which are part >> of the car's total state)? > > The problem is not localized change. The result of stdin.byLine changes the > _entire_ stdin.
Ok, so you have no problem with a car.wheels returning a mutable wheels object? So it's only when the returned property can change the entire state (or a lot of the state?) that you have a problem? I don't understand how degree changes the acceptability. Doesn't seem like it should matter to me. --bb
