OK so you accept that at least [] and () are interchangable. If yes then that means that you agree that what I said was a bug, no:) It is not an inconvenience, feature or such, it is a bug.
Cetin

>Good Morning Cetin,
>
>don't read me by the words. There is no function definition.
>
>It's a bit a joke and a bit of a way to ignore it.
>
>In a other language a expression

identifier[n,x]

will be the cell of an array, while

identifier(n,x)

will be a function or method call.
>

>a = identifier(x)
>identifier(x) = a
>

>might be the use of a collection.
>
>But if you generalize

identifier(x)

as a way to read / write a special item of something no matter how it is defined It is transparent to you what a language does to write or read.
>
>So this is what I mean that you might "read"

identifier(x)

as a function.
>
>Agnes
>>>>So what? You cut your way to calling that function and do you think it is my problem? I don't see how using () instead of [] it made anything good to you.
>>>>Cetin
>>>
>>>There is no function. But you might read it as one if you are unable to read it as an array access.
>>
>>I am having a hard time to understand you. I don't see what do you mean by "read it as one".
>>
>>

Dime FishFingers[10,3]
>>?FishFingers[1,1]
>>
>>
>>PROCEDURE FishFingers(n,y)
>>RETURN m.n * m.y
>>endproc

What does it matter if it were () instead? Would then really the function be called?
>>Cetin