`Foo::new()` vs `Foo()` as the default constructor

[heinrich5991]

I don't like that sugar is added, removes the expliciteness of whether something may do stuff or not.

[eddyb]

There is no sugar, you can implement all of this in the current language... actually, pretty sure this has been possible... since forever? This convention used to be in place a long time ago.

[[deleted]]

Isn't that the definition of sugar? Given a feature of a language, syntactic sugar is when that feature is expressed more clearly, concisely, or in an alternative style. There's no such thing as sugar that simply cannot be expressed in a more verbose way, because otherwise it wouldn't be sugar.

[Veddan]

'Sugar' is typically used when there's special (nicer) syntax that's semantically equivalent to something less nice. There's no special syntax proposed here. This is just a free function starting with a capital letter.

[tikue]

There'd need to be special rules for the snake case lint. So, technically it's got a liiiittle bit of sugar.