[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-11641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17950078#comment-17950078
]
Eric Milles commented on GROOVY-11641:
--------------------------------------
I think this may be one step too far. When I look over the trait specification
for guidance, the only thing I can find on this is that fields need to use the
coded form when used outside of the trait.
[https://docs.groovy-lang.org/latest/html/documentation/#_public_fields]
I don't really like the idea of this, but it is consistent with usage of trait
fields in implementing classes:
{code:groovy}
package p
trait A {
public static final String CONST = "..." // public is discouraged
}
trait B extends A {
static m() {
p_A__CONST // not just "CONST"
}
}
class C implements B {
void test() {
print(m())
}
}
{code}
[~blackdrag] [~paulk] Thoughts on rolling this back?
> trait extends trait and uses static field in static method
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-11641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-11641
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Eric Milles
> Assignee: Eric Milles
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 5.0.0-alpha-13
>
>
> Consider the following:
> {code:groovy}
> trait Foo {
> public static final String BANG = '!'
> }
> trait Bar extends Foo {
> static staticMethod(String string) {
> string + BANG
> }
> }
> class Main implements Bar {
> static test1() {
> String result = staticMethod('works')
> assert result == 'works!'
> }
> void test2() {
> String result = staticMethod('works')
> assert result == 'works!'
> }
> }
> Main.test1()
> new Main().test2()
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
