Uniform function call syntax: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Moved "rust usage of the term" to the end of the article, as an incorrect use does not deserve being above the fold.
Uniform function call syntax was already mentioned
 
(46 intermediate revisions by 31 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{Short description|Programming language feature}}
{{Primary sources|date=September 2017}}
'''Uniform Functionfunction Callcall Syntaxsyntax''' ('''UFCS''') or sometimes '''Universaluniform Functioncall Callsyntax''' Syntax('''UCS''') is a [[programming language]] feature in [[D (programming language)|D]],<ref andname=":0" /> [[Nim (programming language)|Nim]],<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nim by Example - Procs |url=https://nim-by-example.github.io/procs/ |access-date=2024-05-19 |website=nim-by-example.github.io}}</ref> Koka,<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Koka Programming Language |url=https://koka-lang.github.io/koka/doc/book.html |access-date=2024-05-19 |website=koka-lang.github.io}}</ref> and Effekt<ref>{{Cite web |title=Functions |url=https://effekt-lang.org/tour/functions |access-date=2025-04-09 |website=Effekt Language}}</ref> that allows any [[function (computer programming)|function]] to be called using the syntax for method calls (as in [[object-oriented programming]]), by using the [[receiver (object oriented programming)|receiver]] as the first parameter, and the given arguments as the remaining parameters.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://dlang.org/function.html#pseudo-member |title=Functions - D Programming Language|website=Dlang.org|accessdate=1D October 2017}}</ref> UFCS is particularly useful when function calls are chained<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/ufcs.html|title=Programming inLanguage D - Universal Function Call Syntax (UFCS)|website=Ddili.org|accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> (behavingThe similarsame totechnique [[Pipeis (computerused science)|pipe]]s, orin the various dedicated [[Operator (computer programming)|operatorAviSynth]]s available in [[functionalscripting language]]s for passing values through a series of [[Expression (computer science)|expression]]s). It allows free-functions to fill a role similar to [[extension method]]s in some other languages. Another benefit ofunder the methodname call syntax is use with"OOP notation"[[dot-autocomplete]]" in [[IDE (computing)|IDE]]s, which use type information to show a list of available functions, dependent on the context. When the programmer starts with an argument, the set of potentially applicable functions is greatly narrowed down,<ref name="auto">{{cite web |title="UnifiedOperators Call|website=Avisynth wiki Syntax"|url=httpshttp://isocppavisynth.orgnl/files/papers/N4165index.pdfphp/Operators#Operator_Precedence |formatquote=PDF|website=Isocpp<code>a.org|accessdate=1function(b)</code> Octoberis 2017equivalent to <code>function(a, b)</code>}}</ref> aiding discoverability.
 
UFCS is particularly useful when function calls are chained<ref name=":0">{{cite web |url=http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/ufcs.html |title=Universal Function Call Syntax (UFCS) |website=Programming in D |accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> (behaving similar to [[Pipe (computer science)|pipes]], or the various dedicated [[Operator (computer programming)|operators]] available in [[functional language]]s for passing values through a series of [[Expression (computer science)|expressions]]). It allows free functions to fill a role similar to [[extension method]]s in some other languages. Another benefit of the syntax is related to completion systems in [[Integrated development environment|IDEs]], which use type information to show a list of available functions, dependent on the context. When the programmer starts with an argument, the set of potentially applicable functions is greatly narrowed down,<ref name="auto">{{cite web |title=Unified Call Syntax |url=https://isocpp.org/files/papers/N4165.pdf |website=Isocpp.org |accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> aiding [[discoverability]].
== C++ proposal ==
It has been proposed (as of 2016) for addition to C++ by [[Bjarne Stroustrup]]<ref>{{cite web|title="UFCS proposal"|url=http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4174.pdf|format=PDF|website=Open-std.org|accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> and [[Herb Sutter]]<ref name="auto"/>, to reduce the ambiguous decision between writing [[free function (c++)|free function]]s and member functions, to simplify the writing of [[generic programming|templated code]]. Many programmers are tempted to write member functions to get the benefits of the member function syntax (e.g. "[[dot-autocomplete]]" to list [[member function]]s);<ref>{{cite web|title=using intellisense|url=https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hcw1s69b.aspx|website=Msdn.microsoft.com|accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> however, this leads to excessive [[Coupling (computer programming)|coupling]] between [[Class (computer programming)|classes]].<ref>{{cite web|title="How Non-Member Functions improve encapsulation|url=http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/how-non-member-functions-improve-encapsu/184401197|website=Drdobbs.com|accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref>
 
== Examples ==
=== D programming language ===
<sourcesyntaxhighlight lang="Dd">
import std.stdio;
 
int first(int[] arr)
{
Line 28 ⟶ 25:
auto a = [0, 1, 2, 3];
 
// Allall the following are correct and equivalent
int b = first(a);
int c = a.first();
int d = a.first;
 
// Chainingchaining
int[] e = a.addone().addone();
}
</syntaxhighlight>
</source>
 
=== Nim programming language ===
<sourcesyntaxhighlight lang="Nimnim">
type Vector = tuple[x, y: int]
 
proc add(a, b: Vector): Vector =
(a.x + b.x, a.y + b.y)
 
let
v1 = (x: -1, y: 4)
v2 = (x: 5, y: -2)
 
# all the following are correct
v3 = add(v1, v2)
v4 = v1.add(v2)
v5 = v1.add(v2).add(v1v4)
</syntaxhighlight>
</source>
 
== C++ proposal ==
Proposals for a unification of member function and free function calling syntax have been discussed from the early years of [[C++]] standardization. Glassborow (2004) proposed a uniform calling syntax (UCS), allowing specially annotated free functions to be called with member function notation.<ref>{{cite web |title=N1585: Uniform Calling Syntax (Re-opening public interfaces) |author=Francis Glassborow |date=2 May 2004 |url=http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1585.pdf |accessdate=17 December 2018}}</ref>
ItIn has2016 it beenwas proposed (asa ofsecond 2016)time for addition to C++ by [[Bjarne Stroustrup]]<ref>{{cite web |title="UFCS proposal" |url=http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4174.pdf|format=PDF |website=Open-std.org |accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> and [[Herb Sutter]],<ref name="auto"/>, to reduce the ambiguous decision between writing [[free functionFunction (ccomputer programming)#C and C++)|free functionfunctions]]s and member functions, to simplify the writing of [[generic programming|templated code]]. Many programmers are tempted to write member functions to get the benefits of the member function syntax (e.g. "[[Code completion|dot-autocomplete]]" to list [[member function]]s);<ref>{{cite web |title=usingUsing IntelliSense intellisense|url=https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hcw1s69b.aspx |website=Msdn.microsoft.comMSDN |accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> however, this leads to excessive [[Coupling (computer programming)|coupling]] between [[Class (computer programming)|classes]].<ref>{{cite web |title="How Non-Member Functions improveImprove Encapsulation encapsulation|url=httphttps://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/how-non-member-functions-improve-encapsu/184401197 |website=Drdobbs.com |accessdate=1 October 2017}}</ref> This was again, in 2023, proposed by Herb Sutter<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sutter |first=Herb |date=13 October 2023 |title=Unified function call syntax (UFCS) |url=https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2023/p3021r0.pdf }}</ref> claiming new information and insights, as well as an experimental implementation in the cppfront compiler.
 
== Rust usage of the term ==
Until 2018, it was common<ref>{{Cite web |title=Rename UFCS to accurately reflect its functionality. · Issue #1140 · rust-lang/rfcs |url=https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1140 |access-date=2024-05-19 |website=GitHub |language=en}}</ref> to use this term when actually referring to ''[https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1140#issuecomment-108644620 qualified/explicit path syntax]'' and most commonly the ''[https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.30.0/book/2018-edition/ch19-03-advanced-traits.html?highlight=trait,function,call#fully-qualified-syntax-for-disambiguation-calling-methods-with-the-same-name Fullyfully Qualifiedqualified Syntaxpath for Disambiguationsyntax].'': Inbecause Rustit manyis traitspossible canto implementhave functionsseveral withtraits defining the same namemethod forimplemented aon giventhe type,same sostruct, a mechanism is requiredneeded to telldisambiguate thewhich compilertrait whichshould onebe used. Member functions can also be used as free functions through a qualified (namespaced) path. The term UFCS is incorrect for these uses, as it shouldallows useusing methods as (namespaced) free functions, but not using free functions as methods.
 
== See also ==
Member functions can also be used as free functions by accessing them through the type.
* [[traitTrait (computer programming)]]
 
* [[interfaceInterface (computer programming)]]
The term UFCS is incorrect for these uses, as it allows using methods as (namespaced) free functions, but not using free functions as methods.
 
==See also==
* [[trait (computer programming)]]
* [[interface (computer programming)]]
* [[Go (programming language)]], another language with a more open philosophy to methods
* [[Loose coupling]]
* [[Duck typing]]
* [[Method chaining]]
 
== References ==
{{Reflist}}
 
[[Category:Articles with example code]]
[[Category:SourceArticles with example D code]]
[[Category:Object-oriented programming]]
[[Category:Source code]]
[[Category:Subroutines]]
[[Category:Articles with example code]]