http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8381
--- Comment #6 from David Piepgrass <qwertie...@gmail.com> 2012-07-12 12:06:36 PDT --- Argh, so many typos, I should be careful when I rename things... > // Static helper method provides an easy way to create MyClass > public static Foo LoadFrom(string filename, ...) > However, the client didn't like that, and insisted that Create() should be a > constructor "for consistency". I was able to rearrange things to make Create() > into a constructor, but my code was a little clunkier that way. s/MyClass/Foo/ s/Create/LoadFrom/ Oh how nice it would be if we could simply correct our posts. > You could also argue that it's not obvious that: > var.func(arg); > > ...can "transform" itself into: > func(var, arg); That feature is used very often, so newcomers will learn it quickly. And it is definitely a more obvious transformation than func!Type(...). P.S. I'm just throwing it out there, but couldn't classes themselves be treated as objects, a la Objective C? That could open the door to another approach, in which UFCS applies to class objects. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------