Re: Parenthesized Target Notation (was: Partial retraction)

Il giorno lun, 02/05/2005 alle 21.23 +0200, Valéry Croizier ha scritto:
> Richard A. O'Keefe a écrit :
> 
> >	  require
> >	  h
> >	  (a + b).g
> >  
> >
> >That is, the (| ... |) stuff is being introduced to solve
> >an ambiguity problem that CONFESSEDLY DOES NOT EXIST!
> >The presence of the "." after the ")" disambiguates!
> >
> >  
> >
> The ambiguity remains because 'h' could be either a parameterless 
> feature or a feature that takes one argument. This is a problem for 
> front-end based tools like syntax highlighter, that need to lookup a 
> symbol table to parse the code properly, and become more complex.
Sorry for the dumb question, but isn't a semicolon useful to resolve the
disambiguity? Ok, semicolons are almost facultative, but that's a really
good concrete exampple about where it does matter to place a ; instead
of requiring an obscure kind of parentesis...

My 2cent....