[m-dev.] Re: [m-rev.] field syntax (was: smart recompilation)

Fergus Henderson fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU
Sat Jul 7 01:05:11 AEST 2001

On 06-Jul-2001, Ralph Becket <rbeck at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > From: Simon Taylor [mailto:stayl at cs.mu.OZ.AU]
> > Sent: 06 July 2001 14:28
> > 
> > How is the length of a string settable?
> I also think that read-only fields are a good thing.
> Can this problem not be resolved by considering (^) as
> method invocation rather than field access?  Java, C# etc.
> are all quite happy to overload (.) for field access and
> method invocation.

Those languages distinguish field access from method invocation
by the absence or presence of "()" after the field/method name.

Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au

More information about the developers mailing list