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

[Don]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> Jason House wrote:
>> Bruno Medeiros 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?
>>>
>>
>>
>> It may be easy to parse, but it isn't easy to read.
>>
>> What is goban[19]?  Is it an array or a template?  I'd hate to be reading
>> through somebody else's code and have to decipher what things mean.
> 
> I give the same answer I gave to Bill:
> 
> True, you'd have to follow /goban/ to find out. But that is just a hover 
> of the mouse away. :)
> 
> 
> Just for the record, I'm also not bothered by !(), but if some people 
> really find the urge to change it, I'd much rather have brackets than 
> the ugly sad pirate. I say ugly because the dot is much more common than 
> the '!', and for me it has a more solidified meaning of accessing 
> members, so seeing it used as part of the template instantiation syntax 
> looks weird.
> 
That's my opinion, too.

Using square brackets would certainly fit with Walter's goal of making 
templates less threatening for newcomers.
It would be pretty cool to teach a newbie:

int[] a;
int[double] b;  // this is an AA
priorityqueue[double] c; // this is a template