Control Invocation Syntax++

[Neal Gafter]

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Peter Levart <peter.levart at marand.si> wrote:
> I'm sure you meant that but it was to verbose to put into the spec. document.

I can easily believe you are correct, but I haven't reviewed your
comment in detail.

> Ok, now to something different. I was thinking about an alternative syntax.
>
> First, the syntax of parenthesized expression migh allow the expression in it to be optional:
>
>    ParExpression:
>        ( [BlockStatements] Expression )
>        ( BlockStatements )

Yes, that is different.  Why would you make that suggestion?

> Next, instead of "ControlInvocationStatement" I would propose "ControlInvocation" expression (being one of possible "Primary" expressions):
>
>    ControlInvocation:
>        [for] MethodName ( FormalParameters [: ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] Primary [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( FormalParameters [: ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] super [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( FormalParameters [: ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] ClassName . super [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( FormalParameters [: ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] TypeName [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( FormalParameters [: ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] MethodName ( [ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] Primary [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( [ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] super [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( [ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] ClassName . super [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( [ArgumentList] ) ParExpression
>        [for] TypeName [. NonWildTypeArguments] Identifier ( [ArgumentList] ) ParExpression

These are all ambiguous with the idea of being able to invoke an
expression of function type without the ".invoke".

Cheers,
Neal