Functional syntax

Now that Jan has made it clear that the new features are not going to go
away, I'd like to bump my proposal to take functional syntax one step
further:

On 28-11-13 13:44, Kilian Evang wrote:
> But why stop at dicts? Can we also get a ./1
> which also "evaluates expressions in place" without a dict to call it
> "on"? The functional syntax so far provides "method calls", why not also
> "function calls"? For example:
> 
> calc(Expr) := Result :-
>   Result is Expr.
> 
> ?- length(List, .calc(1 + 1)).
> List = [_G1821, _G1824].

Any opinions on this?

Cheers,
Kilian