On Monday, April 23, 2012 02:40:42 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 23:54:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > Well, strict enforcement is how @property was designed in the
> > first place (and is how it's described in TDPL).
>
> That doesn't affect my argument at all,
>
> People
On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 23:54:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Well, strict enforcement is how @property was designed in the
first place (and is how it's described in TDPL).
That doesn't affect my argument at all,
People actually use the implementation as it is, which
is a superset of the T
On Monday, April 23, 2012 01:39:44 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 23:21:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > Well, I completely disagree with you on @property.
>
> Note: my problem is with -property, not @property.
>
> If @property was correctly implemented, it'd serve
> a very
On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 23:21:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Well, I completely disagree with you on @property.
Note: my problem is with -property, not @property.
If @property was correctly implemented, it'd serve
a very nice purpose. The reason I'm aware of the
bug is this is something I
On Monday, April 23, 2012 01:01:48 Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 22:36:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > Eventually -property will be the normal behavior.
>
> Note that -property adds zero value, much like the current
> implementation of @property, which fails to disambiguat
On Sunday, 22 April 2012 at 22:36:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Eventually -property will be the normal behavior.
Note that -property adds zero value, much like the current
implementation of @property, which fails to disambiguate
cases:
==
import std.stdio;
alias void delegate() callable;
On Sunday, April 22, 2012 22:30:01 David wrote:
> For now you can do it *without* @property and compile *without* -property
But that will not remain the case, so relying on that is not a good idea.
Eventually -property will be the normal behavior.
As for opPropDispatch, I don't think t
uot;dispatcher" that supports both the normal method
syntax and the property syntax simultaneously. Is this going to change
in the future?
And if so, how will this be done?
Like this?
struct Dispatcher
{
@property
void opPropDispatch(string name)(string val)
{
writeln(val);
}
@property
string o
this?
struct Dispatcher
{
@property
void opPropDispatch(string name)(string val)
{
writeln(val);
}
@property
string opPropDispatch(string name)()
{
return "getter";
}
