Chris Monsanto wrote:
> so those uncomfortable with
> this (basic) idea can continue to use parens in their function calls.
But we would have to read people's code who didn't use them.
> my_func2 # call other function
> my_func2() # call it again
So, those two are the same, but these two are different?
print my_func2
print my_func2()
What about these two?
x.y().z
x.y().z()
Would this apply to anything which implements callable?
> # Method call?
> f = open("myfile")
> f.close
What happens in
for x in dir(f):
x
? If some things are functions, do they get called and the other things
don't?
> --Pros:--
> 1) Removes unnecessary verbosity for the majority of situations.
"unnecessary verbosity" is kind of stretching it. Two whole characters
in some situations is hardly a huge burden.
> I'm willing to write up a proper PEP if anyone is interested in the
> idea. I figured I'd poll around first.
I vote "AAAAAAaaaahhhh! Dear god, no!". ;)
Seriously, knowing at a glance the difference between function
references and function invocations is one of the reasons I like Python
(and dislike Ruby). Your proposal would severely compromise that
functionality.
Later,
Blake.
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
