On Sunday, August 05, 2012 04:25:26 Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > On Sunday, 5 August 2012 at 02:17:18 UTC, bearophile wrote: > > I think I'd like functions not marked with @property to require > > the (). > > You have the -property switch for breaking piles of perfectly > good code while enabling no new functionality. > > What I'm doing is completely independent of -property: I'm making > @properties actually work. > > > And I'm almost there... I just got the struct members working but > introduced a regression where dmd assert fails.
And I think that the only thing that the -property switch currently gets _right_ is complaining about non-property functions getting called with parens. It's very buggy. Regardless, there are indeed two general issues here: 1. Make @property work in general. 2. Make -property work correctly. - Jonathan M Davis