Function calls

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Pelle Månsson wrote:
> On 01/28/2010 11:23 PM, Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>
>>> I agree. So where's the consensus? Things seemed so clear when people
>>> were beaten with @property over their head.
>>
>> If I read the TLP correctly, @property seems not to be working correctly.
>>
>> @property (or any other notation marking property getters/setters) 
>> should be
>> enforced. Functions that have it must only be invoked using property
>> syntax. Functions that don't have it must be called with parentheses.
>> That's the whole point. To give the designer of the class control over 
>> how
>> it is used.
>>
>> The problem is people blurring the line between what's supposed to be a
>> function and what's supposed to be a property, by abusing property syntax
>> to invoke actions without parentheses.
>>
>> In reality, I believe there's not only a clear line between the two
>> intentions, there's a demilitarized zone. You just need to enforce it. 
>> You
>> can't have your cake and eat it too.
>>
> 
> I don't understand what any of this would improve. Is the byLine example 
> less readable without the ()? Is it more bug prone?
> 
> The only thing achieved as I can see is that every class designer makes 
> up his own rules about which functions are property and which are not. 
> If this is somehow enforced, it will become a guessing game about how to 
> call no-argument functions. For what?

++

Andrei