On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:58:26 -0600, Evan Driscoll wrote: > On 01/14/2012 02:11 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Rick Johnson >> <rantingrickjohn...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> THAT PISSES ME OFF!!!>:( We should never be forced to guess if a name >>> is a callable or a variable! >>> >>> So how do we solve this dilemma you ask??? Well, we need to "mark" >>> method OR variable names (OR both!) with syntactic markers so there >>> will be NO confusion. >> >> I might be being bit OT, but, you should give Common Lisp a try. It >> does something similar for functions versus variables. >> >> As for the issue, I suppose I can see how this would be confusing. I >> don't agree with your solution, though. > > It also has some problems. For instance, if an object has a member which > is a type that implements __call__ but is also useful to access "on its > own", is that a field or a function?
This is the problem with Ruby's syntax for calling functions with no argument with brackets. Since f on its own is interpreted as "call f with no arguments", there is no easy way to get a reference to the object f. This makes functions second-class objects in Ruby, since you can't refer to them easily by name like you can other objects. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
