On Sunday, 5 August 2012 at 15:45:37 UTC, bearophile wrote:
What about turning octal into a propety to fix this problem?
octal actually works because it isn't a function.
But in general, changing non-properties to properties just for
syntax is backward anyway. Whether something is a property or not
isn't a question of parenthesis. I think it was a mistake to
conflate "property" with "parenthesis-less syntax" in the first
place, since they aren't really the same thing.
A getX/setX pair in C++ is conceptually a property, but uses a
different syntax. A method call in Ruby is still a method call,
despite being able to write it without parens.
Something should be marked @property because it fits the
conceptual definition, not because you want to leave parens out.
That's also why I don't like -property's implementation: it
focuses purely on the syntax, without worrying about the concept.
If you get the concept right, the syntax will fit on its own -
for example, a property returning an int shouldn't be callable
with () because calling an int like a function is nonsense
regardless.
All my large amount of D2 code gives no warning with -property.
Maybe you should fix your code.
Maybe you should pay my mortgage.
