On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:52:27 +0300, bearophile <bearophileh...@lycos.com> wrote:
Nick Sabalausky:
Yes, but 1. As you indicated, it could only happen in D when using an
initializer on an "auto". And 2. I would imagine that would probably get
caught as soon x was used.
You are right, Python being dynamically typed the situation is a little
worse there.
then using "foo" without "&" or "()" should be
prohibited. (In fact, maybe that would be the ideal solution?)
That's what I was saying, to disallow "foo" without () or &. It's not
the ideal situation but to me it looks better than the current ones (of
both Python and D1).
Bye,
bearophile
Yes, this is the best design so far.
I'd also note that using foo without either "&" or "()" is still necessary to
get access to foo's set of properties:
auto s = foo.stringof;
auto m = foo.mangleof;
// etc
Other than that I'm absolutely agree with both of you.
Too bad language designers don't participate in the discussion.
