Omissible Parentheses...

[Chad J]

KennyTM~ wrote:
> Chad J wrote:
>> Robert Jacques wrote:
>>> On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 16:00:52 -0400, Michiel Helvensteijn
>>> <m.helvensteijn.remove at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert Jacques wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I like them too (a lot). I find they increase the clarity of my code
>>>>> (particularly function chaining).
>>>> I think that when you find you need to use function-chaining, the
>>>> functions
>>>> (except possibly the rightmost) are often meant to be
>>>> properties/fields.
>>>> That's why they would look more natural without parentheses.
>>>>
>>> Nope. I meant _function_ chaining. This comment comes mostly from using
>>> std.string and std.algorithm, whose functions don't behave as fields.
>>> Both of these libraries show off the power you get from the flexibility
>>> of function call / property duality. I've also used toggle/flag setting
>>> methods in this way. It's concise, clean and very understandable.
>>>
>>
>> Interesting.  I don't think I've seen this angle yet.
>>
>> Could you provide code examples, please?
> 
> "<p>yes?</p>".replace("<", "&lt;").replace(">", "&gt;");

I'm not seeing the use of function/property duals or the lack of
parentheses.  Am I missing it?

(To be clear, I am not looking for an example of function chaining.  I'd
like to see why function/property duals are useful for function chaining.)