Uniform Function Call Syntax (UFCS) about v

[heyimtcn]

this could be implemented as the pipe operator in elixir where:

other_function() |> new_function() |> baz() |> bar() |> foo()

is the same as

foo(bar(baz(new_function(other_function()))))

so v can still be methods with the same syntax

i'm personally very much against the idea of replacing methods with functions, they allow the type's methods to be with the type which is much more organised and intuitive, whereas having all methods be functions would lead modules to be much more cluttered and making it almost impossible to differentiate traditional methods and functions apart

[KhalyutkinVictor]

Im really cant imagine situation where i need to differ methods and functions. In this case we can easily extend other code without any breakings because we cant touch private things in that functions, and it even allows to extend regular types like int or string.
It is like mixins

Pipe operator is ok, but it will add new pipe operator, UFCS just reuse .. Also UFCS has clearest syntax even in simple situations. I mean you write subject.op(arg), but in other case you woud write op(subject, arg) or subject |> op(arg), for me first way is the clearest one