Wouldn't it be easier/better to require stuff like that (which will be a
programming error in 99.999...% of cases) require an e.g. @LenientMode
annotation to not raise a compilation error (wherever that error is
located) ?
class Foo {
@LenientMod
void baz() { return 42 } // compiles &
Paul,
thanks for elucidation!
Incidentally, as for the runtime — in my personal opinion the point is in that
void is void is void, i.e., whilst
void foo() { return 42 }
should be an error (I'd rather vote for compile-time, though it of course is
arguable whether not to move it to runtime),
I think you are correct that we should do this differently. In fact, there
is a comment along those lines in the code:
https://github.com/apache/groovy/blob/master/src/main/java/org/codehaus/groovy/classgen/asm/StatementWriter.java#L601
You wouldn't want the check too early so that AST
Ladies and gentlemen,
I've just bumped into the problem shown below.
Whilst it is arguable whether the situation should be valid or not (myself, I
strongly believe it should be valid and compiled without a glitch), even if
invalid, it should not cause an uncaught exception, but simply report a
