On 02/05/2013 09:17 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 5 February 2013 at 07:14:49 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-02-04 16:08, deadalnix wrote:
OK, I missed that (I have to say I don't really know that language and
went over it quite quickly). The point that was important to me is that
this is not really applicable to D.
I think it's important to the reason why these languages don't have
any problems with optional parentheses and why D do have. Otherwise I
think this whole thread is kind of pointless.
Yes, this is why I went quickly over cofeescript : it is clearly not at
all the same thin as D.
Now I think the most relevant one is scala here.
So in scala, funName is a polysemic expression : it is either the
function or the function's result after evaluation. Scala get from
context which one make sense.
The major difference I see with scala are :
- You have no unary & operator to get address of. Confusion in that
regard is completely avoided.
You have suffix _ which has a similar role, however it is not overloaded
to take raw field addresses.
- You don't have an intermediate with unexplainable type between a
function definition and a function (like in C/C++). D try to work around
that in a poor way. Scala totally remove that concept from the language,
as it is a source of trouble without any usefulness.
The only trouble is that there is no use. We definitely should get rid
of that. (Don't allow dereferencing function pointers, together with the
sane parts of DIP23.)
The main question I ask myself is how that behavior would interact with
other D features.
The broken is(T==function) would cease to do anything of use.
