Required Reading: "How Non-Member Functions Improve Encapsulation"

[Patrick Schluter]

On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 at 01:47:39 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> On 10/30/17 9:44 PM, codephantom wrote:
>> On Monday, 30 October 2017 at 23:03:12 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>>
>>> But in D, UFCS allows obj.func() to work for both member 
>>> functions and free functions, so if the client code uses the 
>>> obj.func() syntax, it won't have to care about the difference.
>>>
>> 
>> I don't like it.
>> 
>> When I see obj.func(), to me, func() is a member function. Why 
>> should I spend any time trying to work out whether it's a 
>> member function or a free function? It doesn't make sense to 
>> me.
>> 
>> If it's really a free function, I'd like that to be more 
>> explicit..
>> 
>> e..g
>> 
>> obj.\func().   (or something like that ..where \ means its a 
>> free function)
>
> I once thought as you do (though not as the syntax you 
> propose). I now embrace UFCS fully, it's awesome.
>
And under the hood the difference is also minimal. A member 
function is compiled to a free function in the object file. It's 
only the mangled name that makes the difference.