Re: About eliminating ambiguities safe indexing and ternary expression
On 08.05.20 04:36, J. David Beutel wrote:
[...]
but how does the .join(','):b() part get parsed into .join([',': b()])?
write it like this:
foo.bar x:y
where x is (','), y is b() and bar is join. And this is equal to (thanks
to optional parentheses):
foo.bar([x:y])
bye Jochen
Re: About eliminating ambiguities safe indexing and ternary expression
On 2020-05-07 13:43 , Daniel.Sun wrote:
```
// https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-9522
def a() { null }
def b() { '' }
a()?[b(), a()].join(','):b() // statement with ambiguities
```
The above statement with ambiguities can be parsed into:
1) safe indexing expression, `a()?[[b(), a()]].join([',': b()])`
2) ternary expression, `a() ? ([b(), a()].join(',')) : b()`
I'm not familiar with the new syntax, and this may be beside the point,
but how does the .join(','):b() part get parsed into .join([',': b()])?
Cheers,
11011011
About eliminating ambiguities safe indexing and ternary expression
Hi all,
Safe indexing has been introduced since Groovy 3.0.0, it is useful but
confuses both parser and users sometimes because it is not a real operator
in order to not breaking existing code as possible as we could. For example,
```
// https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-9522
def a() { null }
def b() { '' }
a()?[b(), a()].join(','):b() // statement with ambiguities
```
The above statement with ambiguities can be parsed into:
1) safe indexing expression, `a()?[[b(), a()]].join([',': b()])`
2) ternary expression, `a() ? ([b(), a()].join(',')) : b()`
As safe indexing(i.e. `?[`) has same precedence with safe reference(i.e.
`?.`), safe indexing has higher precedence than ternary expression. When
ambiguities appear, the expression with ambiguities will be parsed into safe
indexing. As a result, the potential issue is hard for user to find early
and is ususally found when code has been executed...
So I propose to make safe indexing operator `?[` become a real operator,
i.e. it will be defined in the groovy lexer.
* pros:
1) No ambiguities
2) Better parsing performance
* cons:
1) Breaking some existing ternary expressions without spaces between`?` and
`[`, e.g. `true?[0] : [1]` will be broken, so it has to be rewritten to
`true? [0] : [1]`
As Groovy 3 has been released, I proposed to apply the change to Groovy 4.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Daniel Sun
-
Apache Groovy committer & PMC member
Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me
Twitter: @daniel_sun
--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Dev-f372993.html
[DRAFT] Apache Groovy May 2020 Board Report (reporting on Feb/Mar/Apr)
Hi Everyone, Any other updates/comments before I submit our latest board report? (Due in a few days) Thanks, Paul. ===>8== ## Description: Apache Groovy is responsible for the evolution and maintenance of the Groovy programming language. Groovy is a multi-faceted JVM programming language. ## Issues: No issues requiring board attention at this time. ## Membership Data: Apache Groovy was founded 2015-11-18 (4 years ago) There are currently 18 committers and 10 PMC members in this project. The Committer-to-PMC ratio is 9:5. Community changes, past quarter: - No new PMC members. Last addition was Daniel Sun on 2019-05-06. - No new committers. Last addition was Eric Milles on 2019-08-21. A new committer has been invited and has accepted. The iCLA has been submitted and we expect it to be processed shortly. ## Project Activity: A highlight of the last quarter was the GA release of Groovy 3.0. We continue to work on bug fixes for 2.5 and 3 and continue to assist other non-Apache projects within the Groovy ecosystem move to 3.0. We are also working on our roadmap for Groovy 4 and expect to release an alpha version some time in about the next quarter. Recent releases: - 2.5.11 was released on 2020-04-10. - 3.0.3 was released on 2020-04-10. - 3.0.2 was released on 2020-03-08. - 2.5.10 was released on 2020-03-06. - 2.4.19 was released on 2020-03-03. - 3.0.1 was released on 2020-02-17. - 3.0.0 was released on 2020-02-10. Downloads (Maven central/bintray only): - For Feb/Mar/Apr quarter: approx 73 million - last 12 months: ~240M - since 2012 (when we started keeping stats from above repos): ~490M ## Community Health: The community has been having discussions about better ways to promote Groovy uptake. There remains very strong interest in Groovy but we need to convert that interest into additional long-term contributors. Last quarter stats: - 79/80 PRs opened/closed on GitHub. - 155/123 issues opened/closed in JIRA. Master/all branch commits: - 342/797 commits were contributed from 27/29 contributors including 18 non-committer contributors (14 new).
