{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254/events","html_url":"https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254","id":67001799,"number":3254,"title":"Do not allow tuple.foo calls anymore","user":{"login":"josevalim","id":9582,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/9582?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim","html_url":"https://github.com/josevalim","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/josevalim/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":1,"created_at":"2015-04-07T22:12:11Z","updated_at":"2015-04-11T06:00:09Z","closed_at":null,"body":"It is about time to break away from this weird Erlang behaviour. Something to be discussed for 2.0."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/comments/91768056","html_url":"https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254#issuecomment-91768056","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/elixir-lang/elixir/issues/3254","id":91768056,"user":{"login":"jcspencer","id":860934,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/860934?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer","html_url":"https://github.com/jcspencer","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jcspencer/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-04-11T06:00:09Z","updated_at":"2015-04-11T06:00:09Z","body":"Are there any currently proposed ideas of a replacement syntax for this behaviour? If not, what do you aim to achieve from breaking away from this behaviour in 2.0?"}}