Function calls

[Pelle Månsson]

On 01/29/2010 12:01 AM, Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org>  wrote:
>> Pelle M�nsson wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/28/2010 11:23 PM, Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I agree. So where's the consensus? Things seemed so clear when people
>>>>> were beaten with @property over their head.
>>>>
>>>> If I read the TLP correctly, @property seems not to be working correctly.
>>>>
>>>> @property (or any other notation marking property getters/setters) should
>>>> be
>>>> enforced. Functions that have it must only be invoked using property
>>>> syntax. Functions that don't have it must be called with parentheses.
>>>> That's the whole point. To give the designer of the class control over
>>>> how
>>>> it is used.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is people blurring the line between what's supposed to be a
>>>> function and what's supposed to be a property, by abusing property syntax
>>>> to invoke actions without parentheses.
>>>>
>>>> In reality, I believe there's not only a clear line between the two
>>>> intentions, there's a demilitarized zone. You just need to enforce it.
>>>> You
>>>> can't have your cake and eat it too.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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?
>
> The "what" is the things listed in DIP4
> (http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP4)
> Particularly these issues:
>
> int delegate() foo() {
> 	return delegate int(){ return 5; };
> }
>
> // Is this an int or a delegate?
> auto x = foo();

A delegate. Same as auto x = foo;

> // Is this a reference to foo, or a reference to the delegate returned by foo?
> auto y =&foo;

A reference to foo.

I feel this is obvious. Maybe I am wrong.