@property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?

[Dicebot]

On Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 17:19:15 UTC, TommiT wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 13:42:33 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> ... but at scope level semantics for reader should be 
>> perfectly clear and unambiguous even if opened in notepad.
>
> I think we have been throwing the term ambiguous around too 
> carelessly. Obviously code must be semantically unambiguous 
> when viewed in a Notepad. I don't think that's an issue with 
> optional parentheses - the issue is just that it's "not as easy 
> to read", which I don't think means the same as ambiguous (I'm 
> sure about all english words though). "Not as easy to read" 
> shouldn't sound nearly as bad as ambiguous - it's just a little 
> inconvenience that can be gotten rid of by using an IDE that 
> does semantic colorization.

"easy to read" == "I can find part of code that interests me 
easily"
"unambiguous" == "I can understand semantics of code I have just 
read with as little additional context as possible"

Ambiguity is mentioned often because there is one for compiler 
and one for programmer. Those two are sometimes similar but 
rather different in nature.