On 13/12/11 11:11 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 12/14/2011 12:14 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On 13/12/11 10:17 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 December 2011 at 21:10:22 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
There's a phrase in Romanian that quite applies: "From the lake into
the well".
I believe the English version is "Out of the frying pan, into the
fire" :)
Inconsequential space-filler opinion: I am OK with @property, mainly
because it's a common feature among PLs, it's better than nothing, and
don't know better solutions.
In my opinion, it's not better than nothing.
What it gives you:
1. A bit of syntactic sugar.
2. The ability to refactor member look up easily.
What it costs:
1. Overloads syntax.
a. obj.field can now be an arbitrary function call.
b. May have arbitrary cost (e.g. T[].length)
??? T[].length is a field access, not a property function. It takes a
small constant amount of time.
Assigning to the length of an array may reallocate it, which is not a
small, nor constant amount of time.
int[] a;
...
a.length = n; // may invoke a GC allocation + O(n) memcpy
