[bitc-dev] DISCUSS: quasi-object syntax

[Eric Rannaud]

On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 10:33 -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
>   Given an application of the form
> 
>      (a.x [args])

O'Caml uses a#x for method calls, and it looks OK. I believe that could
be compatible with BitC's current syntax.

Question: would such a method call notation be somewhat disturbing as it
suggests the first argument is somehow privileged?

Thanks.