On 3/8/11, Jesse Phillips <jessekphillip...@gmail.com> wrote: > What if you are trying to create a method which will act as a property for > the array? If you get it wrong you would get the error that an array doesn't > have the property and scream, "I know that is why I'm building a function > for it. Why won't it find my function stead of looking at what array > provides!"
But wouldn't this case be much more obvious with the property error message? Or maybe it wouldn't.. all I know is I got bitten by this error message a couple of times and it always got me that WTF look on my face. How common are typos in invoking methods versus typos in implementing methods like a UFCS function?
