Hi there,
> Any thoughts?
Does it support properly "foo[null]", too?
That aside, I would just again like to advocate for an, let's say, „full-safe“
mode, where one could set some switch (probably would need to be a compile-time
one I guess) to get implicitly the „safe mode“ for _all_ expressions (methods,
indexes, operators -- have I forgot anything?) without a need to write all
those pesky ?'s explicitly.
Thanks and all the best,
OC
> On 8. 11. 2016, at 5:08 PM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> The new parser supports safe index now, which is proposed by Paul King
> :)
>
> Here are some example code:
>
> assert null == null?[1];
> assert null == null?[1]?[1, 2];
> assert null == null?[1]?[1, 2]?[1, 2, 3];
>
> def a = null;
> assert null == a?[1, 2];
>
> def f() {return null}
> assert null == f()?[1];
>
> More information can be found at the safeIndex branch of
> groovy-parser
> project(https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/tree/safeIndex)
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> BTW, the antlr4 branch of apache/groovy is very old, I am going to
> try to update it with the master.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.Sun
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Safe-index-for-Groovy-3-tp5736558.html
> Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
