On 04/30/2013 05:17 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> If the asterisk (or some other character) offers and easier
> implementation path, whatever.
It doesn't. This is a fringe feature, as evidenced by the fact that you
are having a hard time convincing people that it is needed, and thus
shouldn't overload an existing operator. Visually it would be confusing
to take any well-known operator and give it a different obscure meaning.
But yes, syntax-wise ^ could be made to work, the implementation problem
I referred to is lower-level than that. Properties simply don't carry
this information with them so a lot of things would have to change
internally for this to ever work and if a clean implementation could be
found, like I said, adding it to the reflection functions is the proper
place.
-Rasmus