Hi!
> I really do not want to have a semantic discussion here.
>
> This syntax is sexy, allows us to clean our APIs, and is amazingly handy.
I'm sorry, but I can't understand how we can seriously consider making
object call syntax mean two entirely different things, create
pseudo-objects that look like objects in some situations, but not other
situation and generally make a huge mess out of whole object model -
because "-> is sexy". Is this really a level we want to have in the
discussion?
And no, it does not "allow us to clean our APIs" - I again point out
using -> has nothing to do with cleaning APIs. Repeating "clean APIs"
as if it is some magic spell will not make false statement true, and the
statement that using -> somehow cleans up APIs is false. Cleaning APIs
and pseudo-objects are two completely different things, and nobody yet
shown any relationship between the two.
> The reasons why it is not yet implemented have been listed here, only
> a matter of time :)
IMHO the reason it's not implemented is because it makes very little
sense, and only reason I've seen so far to do it is "because it's sexy".
Come on.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227