Recently Walter has been wanting to remove language features that don't need to be kept to simplify the language.

It seems everybody agrees that binary literals are not a worthy candidate for removal, but one thing that I kept thinking about was @property. As far as I know, hardly anyone actually uses its semantic behaviors, and the ones that it does have which are incomplete are special cases that don't benefit us all that much.

I was going to post this yesterday, but it turns out I am not alone in thinking this can be removed safely (can be swapped to a UDA to prevent code breakage without any language additions).

So, who uses @property semantics?

https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#property-functions

On Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 19:20:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

Not using.

I don't use it, and i don't understand why it exist to be honest

On Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 19:20:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

Delete all @ related features

On Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 19:20:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

So @property is similar to C# get/set? C# get/set are useful if you want an assignment of a member run a function for example. I can see that such a thing can be useful in D as well. If @property is removed can the same be achieved by other means?

On Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 19:20:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

Please consider "pure". :)

Don't care.

Not me. And if I see one, I remove it.

Still, there are 44 @property occurence in my whole code base (because stuff get copy-pasted) that I never really wanted there.

On Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 19:20:04 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

I would use @property a lot if it was actually useful.

struct S {
    int _x;
    @property int x() const {
        return _x;
    }
    @property void x(int value) {
        _x = value;
    }
}
void main() {
    S s;
    // Doesn’t work:
    //s.x += 1;
    // Neither does this:
    //s.x++;
}