Sorry I don't understand what you are saying. What I'm saying is that we already had such an implementation, and we decided to _remove_ it. Are you saying that you have a branch that reintroduces it, or that it's already on master?
I disagree with the statement that the "users require smarter type inference". Type inference is cool, but it's also hard to predict. Sometimes you just don't understand why the compiler inferred something or not. We explicitly chose not to be too smart here, because it can be confusing to users. Le mer. 5 sept. 2018 à 13:36, Daniel.Sun <sun...@apache.org> a écrit : > Hi Cédric, > > > Basically, it's not easy to realize that when you have a non final > methods, subclasses can override the method to return a different type. > > As I proposed, the methods with smarter return type inference should > match one of the following charactristics: > 1) `final` > 2) `private` > 3) `static` > 4) method defined in Script > > So these methods will not be overrided and the return type will be > exact. > > I will leave the implementation as it is util most of groovy users > require the smarter type inference ;-) > > Cheers, > Daniel.Sun > > > > > ----- > Daniel Sun > Apache Groovy committer > Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me > Twitter: @daniel_sun > > -- > Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Dev-f372993.html >
