This may be true to some degree, but I think the fixes to the problems that are mentioned overweights the lost convenience. As @Chris_Lattner3 once said in response to some language sugar pitch of mine, it would be bad if we provide sugar for convenience which will prevent us from having other important language features.
This proposal I assume will also fix the key-path bug that I hit so many times already. Every time I hit it, it forces me to uglify the implementation with a closure based workaround because it prevents me from using key-paths since they suffer the same issue and call the getter where I expect them to call the setter only.
I‘m +1 on this change.