On 5/4/12 2:57 PM, Niko Matsakis wrote:
I had a crazy thought for how to make method call syntax unambiguously
distinguishable from field access without making it ugly.
In short: make `a.b(c, d)` *always* a method call, rather than parsing
it as a call to a value stored in a field. If you actually wanted to
call a closure in a field, you would make that explicit by writing
`(a.b)(c, d)`.
Thoughts?
I like this. It addresses the concern I had when proposing ->, without
the ugliness of ->.
Patrick
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
