Function calls

[Pelle Månsson]

On 01/27/2010 09:54 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> downs wrote:
>> Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 06:34:57PM +0100, Pelle M�nsson wrote:
>>>> I disagree, I find the function calls without the () to be really
>>>> prettifying.
>>>>
>>>> But maybe that's just me.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that it causes serious bugs, you would see that it's
>>>> an integer the moment you try and use it. It also helps changing
>>>> code from/to functions.
>>>>
>>>> I really like this feature, and would miss it should it go away.
>>> Me too.
>>>
>>
>> Me three.
>
> There was a long discussion about that, which prompted the addition of
> @property. I was in the anti- at property camp, but had understanding and
> sympathy for the ambiguity issues involved without @property.
>
> There was a vote in which as far as I recall the pro- at property camp was
> beaten to a tender pulp.
>
> Now @property is in. That has created (as I had anticipated) the
> unresolved issue of choosing between @property or just function for any
> given parameterless function. Also I need to litter my code with
> @property. To this day I am not sure whether we made the right decision.
>
>
> Andrei

Not just parameterless functions, but functions operating on arrays as 
well. And mostly anything, if I recall correctly.