Re: Google Dart

2011-10-10 Thread Noctarius
Yeah sounds quite interesting. Chris Am 10.10.2011 20:58, schrieb Charles Oliver Nutter: > I agree it would be an interesting language on the JVM. It may > be the "dynamic Java" I've wanted to make for a long time, with > the added bonus of optional static types. > > This could almost be a weeke

Re: No way to create a no-op MethodHandle that returns void?

2012-01-23 Thread Noctarius
_ > mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev -- ###### # A Digital's Life # ## Nickname: Noctarius Location: Germany Meet me at: Ohloh: http:/

Re: No way to create a no-op MethodHandle that returns void?

2012-01-24 Thread Noctarius
; } catch (RuntimeException re) { > assertTrue("should not have reached here", false); } > assertEquals("foofinally", stringAry[0]); } > > invokebinder is my MethodHandle DSL, so I don't have to stand > on my head while building MH chains :) > >

Re: JEP 169: Value Objects

2012-11-08 Thread Noctarius
>> mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net >> <mailto:mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev > > > > ___ mlvm-dev > mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net > http://mail.op

Re: JEP 169: Value Objects

2012-11-08 Thread Noctarius
gt; <mailto:mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net> >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ___ mlvm-dev >>>> mailing list mlv

Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-05 Thread Noctarius
Hey Yesterday I started a discussion (not yet very active) on the java.net forums about adding Property Accessors to the Java language. Currently I'm still not totally convinced on how to do all that for example accessors for array index access but I'm pretty sure there are good ideas out there in

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-05 Thread Noctarius
Ok I took some time to make a deeper introduction in what I imagine to do: https://www.sourceprojects.org/default/2013/01/05/135739572.html As mentioned before it would be great if someone is interested in the topic and wants to help. Cheers Chris Am 05.01.2013 15:20, schrieb Noctarius

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-05 Thread Noctarius
Am 05.01.2013 19:15, schrieb BGB: > On 1/5/2013 10:17 AM, Noctarius wrote: >> Ok I took some time to make a deeper introduction in what I >> imagine to do: >> https://www.sourceprojects.org/default/2013/01/05/135739572.html >> >> >> As mentioned

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-05 Thread Noctarius
Am 05.01.2013 19:41, schrieb Remi Forax: > On 01/05/2013 07:37 PM, Noctarius wrote: >> Am 05.01.2013 19:15, schrieb BGB: >>> On 1/5/2013 10:17 AM, Noctarius wrote: >>>> Ok I took some time to make a deeper introduction in what I >>>> imagine to do: >&g

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-05 Thread Noctarius
Am 05.01.2013 21:03, schrieb Remi Forax: > On 01/05/2013 07:53 PM, Noctarius wrote: >> Am 05.01.2013 19:41, schrieb Remi Forax: >>> On 01/05/2013 07:37 PM, Noctarius wrote: >>>> Am 05.01.2013 19:15, schrieb BGB: >>>>> On 1/5/2013 10:17 AM, Noctariu

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-05 Thread Noctarius
Am 05.01.2013 20:44, schrieb BGB: > On 1/5/2013 12:37 PM, Noctarius wrote: >> Am 05.01.2013 19:15, schrieb BGB: >>> On 1/5/2013 10:17 AM, Noctarius wrote: >>>> Ok I took some time to make a deeper introduction in what I >>>> imagine to do: >>>

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-06 Thread Noctarius
Am 06.01.2013 00:44, schrieb John Rose: > On Jan 5, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Remi Forax wrote: > >> I think I prefer a more general mechanism that ask javac to >> replace all access to fields (or methods) for a given class, >> insert an invokedynamic instead and let you specifies the >> bootstrap metho

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-06 Thread Noctarius
Am 05.01.2013 22:47, schrieb BGB: > On 1/5/2013 2:20 PM, Noctarius wrote: >> Am 05.01.2013 20:44, schrieb BGB: >>> On 1/5/2013 12:37 PM, Noctarius wrote: >>>> Am 05.01.2013 19:15, schrieb BGB: >>>>> On 1/5/2013 10:17 AM, Noctarius wrote: >>>&g

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-06 Thread Noctarius
. > Thanks to our approach, if there are getter/setter, then they are > properties. A compiler then can for example simply call the getter and > setter like a normal method... really no special need for a special > instruction just for a static compiler. At least that is what the Gr

Re: Proposal for Property Accessors

2013-01-06 Thread Noctarius
Am 06.01.2013 11:35, schrieb BGB: > On 1/6/2013 3:19 AM, Noctarius wrote: >> Am 06.01.2013 00:44, schrieb John Rose: >>> On Jan 5, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Remi Forax wrote: >>> >>>> I think I prefer a more general mechanism that ask javac >>>> to re

Re: MethodHandle.invoke* performance

2013-04-03 Thread Noctarius
VMware > http://www.springsource.com/ http://twitter.com/CedricChampeau > > > > ___ mlvm-dev > mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev > - -- ###

Re: sun.reflect.Reflection.getCallerClass(int) is going to be removed... how to replace?

2013-07-10 Thread Noctarius
group: de.comp.lang.misc For Groovy >>> programming sources visit http://groovy-lang.org >>> >>> ___ mlvm-dev >>> mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev >&