Function calls

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Pelle Månsson" <pelle.mansson at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hjt46j$5qt$1 at digitalmars.com...
>
> 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?

Class "Foo" has member "bar". Is "bar" a member variable or a member 
function? Can you set it? Does it require arguments? You don't know, do you? 
It's a guessing game.

To the caller, *properties are not functions*! I don't understand why we 
keep having to go in circles on this. They are data. Data, data, data. Not 
functions. Data. "Oh, but no, they're *implemented* as functions!" Who gives 
a crap? That's *implementation*. They're data. Data, data, data. With the 
proposal, if I use a class, that class has data and functions. Not "member 
variables, functions called with parens, and functions called without 
parens." Just data and functions. That's it. Data and functions.

So if this is enforced, and you have a function, how do you call it? *With 
parens*! Why? Because it's a fucking function and functions are fucking 
called with parens! For god's sake, C# has had this for years, and nobody 
ever wonders "Do I use parens?" in C#, because if you're going to use 
something, you already know damn well if it's a function or data. Because if 
you don't know what the hell it is, you can't f***** make sensible use of it 
anyway.