Hi All,

Do you guys use @property much, or is it largely ignored/avoided?

Thanks,
uri

On 4/12/2014 11:21 p.m., uri wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Do you guys use @property much, or is it largely ignored/avoided?
>
> Thanks,
> uri

When it makes sense I use it.

https://github.com/Devisualization/window/blob/master/interfaces/devisualization/window/interfaces/window.d#L144

vs

https://github.com/rikkimax/Dobol/blob/master/source/dobol/parser/dobol/parser/defs.d

On Thursday, 4 December 2014 at 10:24:00 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
> On 4/12/2014 11:21 p.m., uri wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Do you guys use @property much, or is it largely ignored/avoided?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> uri
>
> When it makes sense I use it.
>
> https://github.com/Devisualization/window/blob/master/interfaces/devisualization/window/interfaces/window.d#L144
>
> vs
>
> https://github.com/rikkimax/Dobol/blob/master/source/dobol/parser/dobol/parser/defs.d

Thanks for the examples. As always I found what I needed just after posting:

http://wiki.dlang.org/Property_Discussion_Wrap-up


/uri

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:21:10 +0000
uri via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:

> Do you guys use @property much, or is it largely ignored/avoided?
i'm using it alot for the things that looks like properties. ;-)

the thing is looking like a property if it works almost as fast as accesing the field directly. i.e. does simple check or two, but doesn't calculate something heavy. that means that `area` for Rect is definitely a property, but `equalElementCount` for a single-linked list is not.

i also using that alot to simulate read-only fields.

On Thursday, December 04, 2014 10:21:10 uri via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Do you guys use @property much, or is it largely ignored/avoided?

@property is used rather freuently - e.g. some of the functions in the range API are required to be properties. Typically, @property is used when you'd use a getter or setter in another language (or when you need to emulate a variable). Using get* or set* would generally not be considered idiomatic D and is not typically done. @property functions are used instead.

Now, because the parens are optional on functions with no arguments, there are plenty of cases where functions are called without parens when they're not properties, but property functions are quite common.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Sat, 06 Dec 2014 15:23:10 -0800
Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, December 04, 2014 10:21:10 uri via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Do you guys use @property much, or is it largely ignored/avoided?
> 
> @property is used rather freuently - e.g. some of the functions in the range API are required to be properties. Typically, @property is used when you'd use a getter or setter in another language (or when you need to emulate a variable). Using get* or set* would generally not be considered idiomatic D and is not typically done. @property functions are used instead.
> 
> Now, because the parens are optional on functions with no arguments, there are plenty of cases where functions are called without parens when they're not properties, but property functions are quite common.
we all waiting for property enforcement fixes (which i already
integrated, heh), so delegate properties can be used as propeties,
omiting the annoying '()'.

as this can break some invalid code (the code where people using properties as functions) i assume that we'll live with half-backed properties forever.

> as this can break some invalid code (the code where people using
> properties as functions)

Does @property ever make sense for a free floating function? I would have thought no but was recently asked to add it if using the function with uniform call syntax.

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dub/pull/455#discussion_r21430311

On Tue, 09 Dec 2014 07:31:20 +0000
Nicholas Londey via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:

> > as this can break some invalid code (the code where people using
> > properties as functions)
> 
> Does @property ever make sense for a free floating function? I would have thought no but was recently asked to add it if using the function with uniform call syntax.
> 
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dub/pull/455#discussion_r21430311
when you want to make a function that acts as getter/setter for delegate callback, for example.

  private void delegate () cb;
  @property auto myCB () { return cb; }
  @property void myCB (void delegate () newcb) {
    /* some checks */
    cb = newcb;
  }

this will work as expected when property enforcement will be fixed -- i.e. you will be able to omit '()' for calling delegate.

alas, this is another thing that is "cosmetic", so PR with property enforcement will rot on github forever.

On 12/9/2014 4:31 PM, Nicholas Londey wrote:

> Does @property ever make sense for a free floating function? I would
> have thought no but was recently asked to add it if using the function
> with uniform call syntax.

I use it from time-to-time. I assume you think of properties as belonging to objects and not just something that is useful with UFCS. Keep in mind that free-floating functions belong to modules and modules (usually) belong to packages. These are units of encapsulation above classes & structs. There could be (and has been in these forums) lengthy debate about what constitutes a property and what doesn't, but whether or not a function belongs to a class or struct shouldn't enter into it, IMO.

On Tuesday, 9 December 2014 at 07:31:21 UTC, Nicholas Londey wrote:
>> as this can break some invalid code (the code where people using
>> properties as functions)
>
> Does @property ever make sense for a free floating function? I would have thought no but was recently asked to add it if using the function with uniform call syntax.
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dub/pull/455#discussion_r21430311

After a quick grep I see phobos uses quite a few free floating @property...