On 07/03/13 05:21, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 04:54:41 Timon Gehr wrote:
>> There is nothing to be gained from subtly breaking this analogy. UFCS
>> can be applied to any callable.
>>
>> You are probably not going to like this, but the following code also works:
>>
>> import std.stdio;
>>
>> struct S{
>> int opCall(int x){ return x+1; }
>> }
>>
>> S s;
>>
>> void main(){
>> auto x = 1;
>> writeln(x.s);
>> }
>
> That is _very_ broken IMHO. It makes no sense for parens to be optional with
> opCall. The whole point of opCall is to overload the parens!
This is an optional-parens issue, not an UFCS issue. Ie Timon's example
only works w/o property enforcement, what actually happens is "writeln(x.s())".
A really bad idea - yes, but it's not an UFCS and ctor specific problem.
artur
