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

[Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d]

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.