Function calls

[Bill Baxter]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:59:30 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>>>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> foreach (line; stdin.byLine()) { ... }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> vs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> foreach (line; stdin.byLine) { ... }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How do I choose?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> byLine is a property.  It is fetching a range on stdin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Steve
>>>>>
>>>>> Damn. I was sure the answer will be different.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe "property" is a misleading word.  Clearly there are more things
>>>> to which that applies than just what the traditional definition of the
>>>> word would imply.  I would not in English call my nose a "property" of
>>>> me, but if I were a D object and had a .nose accessor, I would
>>>> certainly think that accessor would qualify as a D property.
>>>>
>>>> How's this: anything that you can "get" without specifying additional
>>>> information (and which doesn't change the outwardly visible state the
>>>> object when you do so) is a property.   The C# syntax with the special
>>>> use of "get" and "set" perhaps does a better job of conveying this.
>>>
>>> This raises the hair on my back. It's back to programming-by-convention.
>>
>> Wait, you started off by saying "how do I decide?" and we give you a
>> rule you can follow to decide and now you say you don't like it
>> because it's programming-by-convention?   I guess I don't really
>> understand what your argument is.
>
> It's not a rule. It's several contradictory ones.

Please point out the contradictions.  I'm not seeing them.

--bb