Dollar sign ($) on foriegn keyboards? (prothon)

[Peter Otten]

Joe Mason wrote:

> In article <c62m70$2hu$06$1 at news.t-online.com>, Peter Otten wrote:
>> Mark Hahn wrote:
>> 
>>> We are considering switching to the dollar sign ($) for self, instead of
>>> the
>>> period ( . ) we are using now in Prothon.  Ruby uses the at-sign (@) for
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> Apart from that obj$func() hurts my eye more than obj->func() and
>> obj!func(). As always, Python shines here with its obj.func() :-)
> 
> I believe the suggestion is "$.func()" instead of "self.func()" (the
> Python way) or just ".func()" (the earlier Prothon way).  Or possibly
> the suggestion is for "$func()", although I like $.func() much better.

I skimmed too lightly over the first paragraph and missed that - but still
there is the obj$func() example in Mark's post, and with my Python mindset
(I didn't follow the Prothon discussion closely) I cannot figure out what
that is supposed to mean.

> (I like this better than the ., though I still have no problem with
> writing self all the time, so I prefer sticking to the Python way.  It
> solves my main problem with ., which is when you do have to pass self
> explicitly.  "function_call(param1, ., parm2)" is much more confusing
> than "function_call(param1, $, param2)".)

[OT] Seems to happen all the time with Python - try to simplify at some
point and you pay twice elsewhere. Prothon will have a hard time occupying
a local optimum in beauty/simplicity/usefulness that is both near and
better than Python. This starts with the name, by the way - it evokes the
association of prothotype, which looks quite, er, ungreek :-)

Peter