On Nov 20, 2017, at 6:12 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution
<swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>> Separating method calls from property accesses solves the problem
>>
>> Brent wrote:
>>> If we had separate subscripts for methods and properties, then the property
>>> subscript could immediately call the appropriate getters and setters, while
>>> the method subscript could return a ready-to-call `Method` object.
>>
>>
>> Better yet, why bother with the ready-to-call Method-like object? Just call
>> it! A Ruby binding with separate property and method handling would then
>> look like this:
>>
>> extension RubyObj: DynamicMemberLookupProtocol {
>> func callDynamicMethod(dynamicMethod method: String, args:
>> [RubyObject]) -> RubyObj {
>> get {
>> return RubyObject_send(rubyObject, method: member, args: args)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> subscript(dynamicMember member: String) -> RubyObj {
>> get {
>> return RubyObject_send(rubyObject, method: member, args: [])
>> }
>> set {
>> RubyObject_send(rubyObject, method: "\(member)=", args: [newValue])
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> When Swift sees myObj.name, it uses the getter subscript. When Swift sees
>> myObj.name(), it uses the method invocation. Both work in Swift just as they
>> do in Ruby — and more importantly, Ruby APIs wouldn’t feel so very awkward
>> when used from Swift.
>
> Right, that should work directly!
>
I just sent out draft 2 of the DynamicCallable proposal, which directly
includes support for this. Thanks for the discussion and insight!
-Chris
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
