On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 10:09:09 UTC, timotheecour wrote:
There's current disagreement regarding the syntax &a.fun, as it
makes &a.fun be different from &(a.fun):
&a.fun : address of member function
&(a.fun) : address of return value of a.fun
This breaks the usual rules of scoping and makes the expression
&a.fun special. More complex cases can arise, eg: &a.b.c,
&(a+b).c, etc as pointed out by others, plus who knows what
else might come up in practice.
Here's a very simple proposal:
MOAR special cases !
