Lack of IntelliJ support is also a very large thorn in Lombok's side and a
deal-breaker for many.

If Java (the lang) was prescribed then I think I'd want to prevaricate
until lambdas arrive, possibly by playing Duke Nukem Forever in the
meantime...



On 2 May 2012 12:45, Ricky Clarkson <[email protected]> wrote:

> Lombok might just need to be on the classpath when you compile, but it
> changes your source during compilation.  Would two things like Lombok work
> together in the same source file without problems?  If it was just a
> library it wouldn't need IDE plugins.
>
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Fabrizio Giudici <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 13:27:57 +0200, Ricky Clarkson <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>  Annotation processors - too much like magic.  Scala's DSLs are written in
>>> the language and don't require anything other than a library.  You don't
>>>
>>
>> I've said that Java is clearly rougher in this than e.g. Scala, but it
>> does work, and doesn't require more than a library (e.g. lombok.jar). Scala
>> has been designed from the ground up to support inner DSL and we can't
>> really ask Java for doing the same job.
>>
>>
>>  have to worry about two DSLs conflicting with each other (ignoring
>>> implicit
>>> conflicts for a moment) and they don't make classloading or compilation
>>> any
>>> more difficult.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not aware that Lombok, e.g., creates problem with classloading. I'm
>> using it everywhere, including the NetBeans Platform (which does heavy use
>> of classloaders) and Android and it just works. I've only had a problem
>> when using it together AspectJ static weaving, but it was more a problem
>> with the AspectJ Maven plugin that missed an option that makes the two
>> technologies live happily together.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
>> Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
>> [email protected]
>> http://tidalwave.it - http://fabriziogiudici.it
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>



-- 
Kevin Wright
mail: [email protected]
gtalk / msn : [email protected]
quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright
google+: http://gplus.to/thecoda
<[email protected]>
twitter: @thecoda
vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright
steam: kev_lee_wright

"My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not
regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current
conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side
of the ledger" ~ Dijkstra

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to