[jesserayadkins2]

I've heard a few complaints about this now, so I'm thinking of changing it. I wanted to cram a lot into a small space, and it didn't do so well.

The piping is more an example of how piping works with everything and that, yes, the new method really really is a method instead of some magical keyword.

But I stand by piping: https://lorgonblog.wordpress.com/2008/03/30/pipelining-in-f/

[ebbv]

I can understand why piping is attractive, and if you want it as a language defining feature as the author that's your prerogative. :)

So is the .new() method in that case an alternate constructor (i.e. constructor code will not run only the contents of the new method will) or is it a method being invoked after the constructor code runs?

[jesserayadkins2]

No, there's only one constructor for any given class. The body of a class is the constructor of a class, and that constructor is made available through a method called .new. It's sort of like...Python, and imagining that you get __init__ created for you automatically. It's just two ways of doing the same inner call.

[mkesper]

Python omits the new() thing, didn't miss it yet.

[qznc]

An alternative would be Uniform Function Call Syntax: https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#pseudo-member