[Sharlin]

C++ and Rust require extra disambiguating syntax in some contexts (C++ the `foo.template bar<T>()` syntax, Rust the "superfish operator" `foo.bar::<T>()`. Java works around the problem by awkwardly putting the generic argument list in front of the method name (`foo.<T>bar()`). I don't know about C#.

[DougBTX]

C# is `foo.bar<T>()`, I’m not sure what compromises that had to make for that to work but from an end-user perspective it works well.

[oxnrtr]

They parse it one way, and if they figure out the other parse option was right, they go back and fix the parse tree.

Basically, unlimited look-ahead.

[lostmsu]

Is it somehow a problem?

[steveklabnik]

(teeny tiny note: turbofish, not superfish)

[Sharlin]

Oops :D

[oxnrtr]

Using [] is the optimal choice for languages in general, but they can't even use that because they blew away that syntax for indexing.

[Sharlin]

Scala uses [] for generics and () for indexing, which sort of makes sense given that in the end arrays are just functions.

[lostmsu]

So are the uninstantiated generic types ;-)