[Grace-core] minor language issues

[Michael Homer]

(resending copy to the list)
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 5:39 PM, James Noble <kjx at ecs.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:
>> x.foo() foo() seems perfectly reasonable to me, if the method in question was declared as
>>
>>       method foo(*a) foo(*b)
>>
>> If it wasn’t, we would get a dynamic error when foo()foo() is invoked with the wrong number of arguments.
>
> or should we write it  x.foo foo
>
> (note that the current syntax does NOT support this!)
Note also that this entire paragraph (and, in fact, perhaps the
majority of prose text! I'm not sure) would be syntactically valid at
this point under the rules you have proposed. Is that really something
you want? Are you sure? It seems like quite a contrast from what
you've argued for elsewhere (but on the other hand, just like
anything-goes spacing, it lets you copy more fourteenth-century
Italian poetry into your exams verbatim, so there's that)
> x.foo( "A", "B") stuff [1, 2, 3]
> x.foo( "A", "B") stuff [1]
> x.foo( "A", "B") stuff []
This version is not syntactically compatible with indexing operators,
so you'd have to choose one or the other.
-Michael