Re: [groovy-user] Oddities in the grammar that effect DSL writing

melix schrieb:
> That's right and it must be the reason why I feel it more natural :)
> 
> However, today I do things like this (syntactically valid in Groovy) :
> 
> import static com.lingway.Utils.*;
> 
> ...
> 
> select { node.do(it) }?.store()
> 
> ..
> 
> select is a primitive (statically imported method) which injects a closure
> (it) to the do() method. The fun thing is the last part of the expression,
> which means "if the select primitive returns something, then call the method
> store() on the result". It's something I'm heavily using in my DSL. If the
> behaviour of Groovy was changed so that it looks like functional programming
> languages when dropping parenthesis, then it would be interpreted like this
> :
> 
> select({ node.do(it) }?.store())
> 
> However, I think I can live with the following syntax, which IMHO is less
> disturbing :
> 
> (select { node.doi(t) })?.store()

but in a GPath...?

nodes.first.findAll{it.prop='11'}.each{println it}

that would have to become:

(nodes.first.findAll{it.prop='11'}).each{println it}

or

nodes.first.findAll({it.prop='11'}).each{println it}

or it is whitespace sensitive...

bye blackdrag

--

-- 
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
The Groovy Project Tech Lead (http://groovy.codehaus.org)
http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
http://www.g2one.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email