shouting versus dotting

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

KennyTM~ wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Michel Fortin wrote:
>>> On 2008-10-05 01:14:17 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu 
>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> said:
>>>
>>> -- snip --
>>>
>>> Or we could use special delimiter characters:
>>>
>>>     Positive<real>(joke);
>>>     Positive“real”(joke);
>>>     Positive«real»(joke);
>>>     Positive#real@(joke);
>>>
>>> Each having its own problem though.
>>>
>>> My preference still goes to "!(".
>>
>> There was also Positive{real}(joke), with which I couldn't find an 
>> ambiguity.
>  >
> 
> Ohhhh. Why isn't it considered then? (Suppose we already knew Positive 
> is not a keyword and not preceded by the keywords struct, class, etc.)

I believe it should be considered. At some point there was discussion on 
accepting a last parameter of delegate type outside the function parens. 
The idea was to allow user-defined code to define constructs similar to 
e.g. if and foreach.

But I think that has many other problems (one of which is that the 
delegate can't reasonably specify parameters), so we can safely discount 
that as a problem.

I'd want to give it a try. How do others feel about Template{arguments}?


Andrei