On Thursday 03 March 2011 21:44:20 kenji hara wrote: > 2011/3/4 Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com>: > > On Thursday, March 03, 2011 14:07:30 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > >> On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 16:56:45 -0500, Jonathan M Davis > >> <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > Conceptually, a property makes no sense unless it's a property _of_ > >> > something. > >> > >> This is your opinion, not fact. It is a property of the program/global > >> namespace/module whatever you want to call it. > > > > Per the definition of the word property, a property must be property _of_ > > something. Anything else would violate the definition of the word (not > > that programming has ever held itself all that firmly to English > > definitions). You can certainly argue that a global property is a > > property of a module, at which point it _does_ make sense in the sense > > that it is then a property _of_ the module. > > > > However, I definitely think that that's pushing it. Modules are really > > only organizational entities, not things that you deal with directly in > > the code. And > > I can basically agree with you. But that reason can not limit the > design of the module. > Some of D users may consider a module as a singleton. We can't prohibit it. > > > if you have a "property" of a module, then it's more like treating > > @property purely as an abstraction of a variable rather than really > > being a property of something. At that point, I'd almost argue that the > > annotation should have been @variable instead. > > I still have the opposite viewpoint with you. A "property" of a module > should be annotated > with @property. > > > Regardless, I'd still argue that @property shouldn't be allowed at the > > module level as long as it's going to create ambiguities. And adding > > extra rules or syntax to make it unambiguous as Kenji is suggesting > > seems like overkill. > > Current @property annotation does not have enforcement. When this has > been improved > in the future, the way annotating ’this' on UFCS will be also necessary.
Only if you allow functions which are "properties" of modules. - Jonathan M Davis