Revised RFC on range design for D2

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

KennyTM~ wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:36 AM, Steven Schveighoffer
>> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> There is no ambiguity either case. You evaluate Stdout.newline. The
>>>> evaluation yields a value of some type. Then you evaluate formatln 
>>>> against
>>>> that value.
>>> OK, then tell me what this does:
>>>
>>> x.y.z();
>>>
>>> Is y a property/field of x or a function call with no args?  I see a 
>>> benefit
>>> to being able to understand a line of code without requiring lots of 
>>> extra
>>> context.  I have to do less lookups of the source of a function or 
>>> property.
>>
>> The problem with this argument is that unless you disallow properties
>> altogether, you still won't know whether y is actually a field or a
>> call to a property method without looking it up.
>>
>> --bb
> 
> I think the distinction of with and without () is pretty stylistic, 
> because the same argument can even be applied to operator overloading 
> (does a=b means pointing the variable a to b, or calling a.opAssign(b)?)
> 
> For me, I would use () if the function do modify the object itself.

But range.next does modify the object. On what basis do I need to add 
the trailing parens?

Andrei