Re: Mike on Properties

On 1 Apr 2004, at 09:37, Andy Dwelly wrote:

> I'm still learning groovy so I read the entry with some interest, and 
> his other comments on groovy with a slight sense of alarm. Whitespaces 
> and newlines are meaningful in some contexts ?

Thats pretty much been fixed now in the new parser.

>  It could cause problems round here because despite our best efforts 
> at standardizing code style between the various people who work and 
> have worked on our projects - differences in layout do creep in. I 
> wonder if there's a potential set of nasty gotcha's waiting for us if 
> we attempt team programming with groovy (someone please, reassure me).

Please be assured that the JSR will remove as much of the confusing & 
ambiguous parts of the language as possible.

> Regarding optionality of ; If dropping that simplified the parser, I 
> certainly wouldn't be disturbed by the requirement. I've been using 
> Pascal, C, C++, and Java for so long, its all I can do to stop myself 
> typing a ; at the end of an English sentence let alone a groovy one;

I hear you - its up to the JSR to decide that one but FWIW languages 
like JavaScript and Ruby (to name just 2) do quite fine without 
mandatory ;

> Regarding the :rw suggestion, I dunno. I haven't used groovy enough to 
> understand the impact. But it immediately struck me that it leads 
> fairly naturally to :x which presumably has something to do with 
> closures.

I'll post a response to Mikes ideas separately.

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/