[issue18788] Proof of concept: implicit call syntax

[Alex Gaynor]

Alex Gaynor added the comment:

I suppose I'm one of the more qualified people to comment on how Ruby does it: a mess of hacks in the lexer/parser. Ruby's case is complicated by the fact that a bare `foo` can either be a local variable or a method call on self. Consider the case `a +b`, should that be parsed as a call to a with a unary + on b, or an addition? In Ruby this depends on whether `a` is already defined as a local. Basically I think this is a terrible idea, and would encourage as strongly as possible to not consider this.

----------
nosy: +alex

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue18788>
_______________________________________