Adam Burton wrote:
What about using something like '->' for dynamic calls instead of '.'?
When
you see '.' your safe in the knowledge that at a glance you know said
method
with said signature exists else the compiler will throw a paddy, when you
see '->' you know that method call is evaluated at runtime. This has the
added benefit that the same class can be used in compile time checking
code
and runtime.
One use I can see for this is the other opDotExp use that's been mentioned in
this thread, namely:
struct s {
opDotExp( string s ) { ... }
}
s obj;
auto command = readInput();
obj->command( ); // calls obj.opDotExp( command )
For message-passing, one could argue that <- would be better than ->, though
there are ambiguity problems with that.
--
Simen
