"David B. Held" <dheld@codelogicconsulting.com> writes:
Rob Stewart wrote:
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
[...] IMO it's very important to distinguish those things that are supposed to have meaning in code from those that are not. Using strongly C++-like syntax here would be confusing, since these things are not identifiers. Isn't that an argument against using the dot, too? I presumed it was the member selection operator as someone else pointed out. Also, my point was that *if* we use C++ notation -- assumed, I'll admit -- to join the parts, then the scope resolution operator is more appropriate.
I would say that the "dot operator" definitely does not constitute "strongly C++-like syntax", since several other languages use it as well, to mean roughly the same thing (at least Java and VB, which are both fairly different from C++ and each other). So the dot operator seems to me to have a somewhat language-neutral connotation that most programmers in general intuitively understand, while the scope resolution operator smacks strongly of C++ to most people who see it, I suspect.
Also, the period is used as a stylistic separator in other contexts, as well. E.g.: 320.555.2839 (phone numbers, IP addresses, filename extensions, etc.) One would be hard-pressed to find a single other use of :: outside of the programming realm.
If I'd had the time, that's what I would've said ;-) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com