[E-Lang] get, set, and dot

Tyler Close tclose@oilspace.com
Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:06:30 -0000

MarcS wrote:
> Trying to project consequences of the change, I foresee the
> following issue.
> I cannot tell how much more often beginners would make the mistake
> of leaving out the parenthesis during construction than
> they would make the
> mistake of leaving out the "new":
> def myThing := thingMaker
> #versus
> def myThing := newThing

If, as I suggest, E also got rid of the "optional ()" sugar, then this
problem would go away. It would then be obvious that neither of these
expressions could possibly be calling a method.

> Truthfully, though, I may be the last guy to get enthused about this
> proposal: I cannot bear to think about all the changes I
> would have to make
> in both the book and the bodies of code I have written if
> we got rid of the
> 1-method constructor. So though I do not think the proposal
> is the right
> choice, I really need to recuse myself from judgement :-)

I sympathize, but this would surely not be the last time that you
would have to make changes. Expecting your code to be anything like
stable before E has persistence is just wishful thinking. These are
definitely Alpha days, despite our desires, and needs, for it to be
otherwise. There is no useful alpha without alpha testers. I dare say
you are one of the very few bonafied E alpha testers, so your efforts
are definitely not in vain. I, personally, greatly appreciate the
substantial efforts you have made.