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

[Tyson Dowd]

On 06-Jul-2001, Ralph Becket <rbeck at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > From: Fergus Henderson [mailto:fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU]
> > Sent: 06 July 2001 16:05
> > >
> > > 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.
> 
> Oh well.  On reflection while I'm happy with the status quo it
> doesn't really bother me one way or the other.  If things are
> to be changed then Peter Schachte's `property' proposal gets
> my vote.

I also quite like Peter's property proposal.

-- 
       Tyson Dowd           # 
                            #  Surreal humour isn't everyone's cup of fur.
     trd at cs.mu.oz.au        # 
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~trd #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------