I wouldn't call @property a 'new' feature... it's been in there for years! ;)


On 21 November 2013 16:06, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
On 11/20/2013 7:14 PM, Manu wrote:
It would be nice to have a commitment on @property.
Currently, () is optional on all functions, and @property means nothing.
I personally think () should not be optional, and @property should require that
() is not present (ie, @property has meaning).

The next release is going to be about bug fixes, not introducing regressions from new features(!). It's a short release cycle, anyway.