From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2002-10-30T13:49:29+09:00
Subject: Re: method-call style (was Re: Snippet: Tiny Featureless Ruby Web Server)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Brannan" <pbrannan@atdesk.com>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: method-call style (was Re: Snippet: Tiny Featureless Ruby Web
Server)


> On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:38:57PM +0900, dblack@candle.superlink.net
wrote:
> > I have a style-related question: I noticed that you put () after all
> > method names, and I was wondering what the origin/purpose/whatever of
> > that was.  I'm neither trying to criticize it, nor likely to adopt
> > it myself :-)  Just wondering.
>
> I do the same thing.  It makes it clear that I'm calling a method and
> not retrieving an attribute.  I suppose it comes from my C++ background:

That's very interesting. I do the exact opposite
for the exact opposite reason. :)

I.e., I don't want the code to show whether I'm
calling a "regular" method or just an accessor.
This seems in line with Meyer's Uniform Access
Principle, IIRC.

Hal