[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-10980?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17716005#comment-17716005
]
Paul King commented on GROOVY-10980:
------------------------------------
We could add something like that.
We have some workarounds for the scenario you describe:
* On the static side for the current transform, you could achieve the same with
the more verbose approach of calling part1(), part2() etc from test() and
applying the transforms (or not) on each of the parts.
* We also have various dynamic tricks EMC, or categories etc., that could be
used.
So, I'd say such an enhancement isn't critical but certainly would make the
static case nicer in certain scenarios. It might not be easy though, for
dynamic typed code, we may not be able to determine the type, and, currently
running in semantic analysis phase, we might not have the required type
information available yet for type checked code.
> Provide an AST transform to rename operator methods
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-10980
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-10980
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Paul King
> Assignee: Paul King
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 5.0.0-alpha-1
>
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
