foo!(bar) ==> foo{bar} ==> foo[bar] (just Brackets)

[Bill Baxter]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Jesse Phillips
<jessekphillips at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:24:46 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>
>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:43 PM, Bruno Medeiros
>>> <brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail> wrote:
>>>> Don wrote:
>>>>> Denis Koroskin wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:22:21 +0400, superdan <super at dan.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Walter Bright Wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dee Girl wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I did not follow this group recent. School started. Sorry! I just
>>>>>>>>> see now and please add my vote if possible. I start with D recent
>>>>>>>>> and I remember beginning. foo!(bar) was not pleasant. Like forced
>>>>>>>>> convention with a bad char. And friends I show code never like
>>>>>>>>> it. It is first thing they say why they do not like D. For me
>>>>>>>>> foo{bar} better idea. Thank you, Dee Girl
>>>>>>>> What do your friends think of { } ?
>>>>>>> School started. Every one so busy now. But I think does not matter
>>>>>>> any more ^_^
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I want to make little idea. Sorry if idea mentioned before (I did
>>>>>>> not read every thread). I think we can look square brackets []. Let
>>>>>>> me explain why.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paren () is over used in C and in D. Any expression can be in ().
>>>>>>> And adding () is possible in many cases. But it is not same with
>>>>>>> []. For example a:(b) is ambiguous but a:[b] is not. So there are
>>>>>>> many signs possible after symbol and before [. They are:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ~ ! @ # $ % ^ & * - + = | \ / , < . > ? :
>>>>> Not all of them work. Here's a few examples:
>>>>>
>>>>>    enum { d= 3, e = 7 }
>>>>>    int [] a=[1,2];
>>>>>    bool c;
>>>>>    auto k=[e]; // kills =
>>>>>    a ~= c?[d]:[e]; // kills ?
>>>>>    int [] f = c?k:[e]; // kills :
>>>>>    if (f>[e]) {}   // kills <
>>>>>    if (f<[e]) {}   // kills >
>>>>>    auto g = (k,[d]); // kills comma
>>>>>    auto h = k~[d]; // kills ~
>>>>>
>>>>> Array ops will kill + - * / & | % ^
>>>>> Suddenly the list looks pretty short. !@#$\.
>>>>
>>>> Hum, what about brackets without any prefix character at all?
>>>>
>>>>  Vector[int, 2] foo;
>>>>  List[Vector[int, 2]] bar;
>>>>  int[3] a = [1, 2, 3]; // array literal here int[int] map;
>>>>  alias DenseMatrix[num] PulType;
>>>>  alias SparseRowsMatrix[num, HashSparseVector] PuuType; alias
>>>>  BiMap[uint, Tuple[uint, uint], BiMapOptions.lhDense] DicType; int var
>>>>  = a[2]; // array indexing here
>>>>
>>>> Hum... doesn't look bad visually. In fact it seems to fit quite nice
>>>> with how associative arrays, and even normal arrays, are declared.
>>>> Hum, yes, I'm personally liking this a lot.
>>>>
>>>> But does it have any ambiguities? Hum, can't think of any off-hand. If
>>>> an identifier appears before a bracket list, it could either be a
>>>> template instantiation, or an array indexation. But the syntax of both
>>>> is the same, so it doesn't need to be distinguished in the parser.
>>>>
>>>> Waddya think, was this discussed before?
>>>
>>> Erm,
>>>
>>> SomeClass[3] a; // template or array?
>>
>> What about it? It doesn't matter for the parser to know if SomeClass is
>> a template or array, it can just keep parsing. Its not like the "class A
>> : B { }" where parsing would continue differently if B was a template
>> instead of a type.
>
> Personally, it is important that I can parse it as a template or array. I
> prefer the !() syntax, it makes it incredibly easy to find creations of a
> template.

I think you may be right.  If nothing technical against it emerges,
the human will likely be the weak link here.

More than SomeClass[3], this is the case that worries me:

   Identifier1[Identifier2]  x;

is it an AA or a templated type?

--bb