Then it sounds as if the three of us, at least, are very much in agreement about what is the appropriate scope for such a “naked dot” feature.
—Guy On Apr 1, 2014, at 7:26 AM, Ulf Zibis <ulf.zi...@cosoco.de> wrote: > > Am 01.04.2014 11:28, schrieb Bruce Chapman: >> Slightly preceding Ulf's coin proposal by a few hours was >> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/coin-dev/2009-March/001134.html >> >> Where I suggested the "naked dot" notation (coined in >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/coin-dev/2009-March/000855.html) has >> better value as ".. a >> syntax for referring to the receiver of a method inside arguments to the >> method." >> >> More formally, the naked dot (at the start of an expression, not following >> an invocation to a void method) would refer to the receiver of the innermost >> surrounding invocation expression. >> >> and so to answer Guy's question below in terms of my original intention >> rather than Ulf's proposal, .indexof("Q") would use myVeryLongNamedString as >> its receiver. > > +1 > My proposal was meant exactly as that. Maybe my wording was not clear enough > in that. > > -Ulf >
