[GitHub] [groovy] eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: GROOVY-7304: handle private field access from closure for ++x and x++

eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/1299#issuecomment-654954174 Also, there is some room for improvement in `org.codehaus.groovy.transform.sc.StaticCompilationVisitor#isStaticallyCompiled` and

[GitHub] [groovy] eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: GROOVY-7304: handle private field access from closure for ++x and x++

eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/1299#issuecomment-654934658 There still seems to be a problem when static compilation is applied using compiler configuration, like is done in the Groovy7276 test. When I added a test case there with

[GitHub] [groovy] eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: GROOVY-7304: handle private field access from closure for ++x and x++

eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/1299#issuecomment-654866505 I think I found the culprit. I will amend the pull request if testing bears out. This is an automated

[GitHub] [groovy] eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: GROOVY-7304: handle private field access from closure for ++x and x++

eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/1299#issuecomment-654564905 I'll have a look This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please

[GitHub] [groovy] eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: GROOVY-7304: handle private field access from closure for ++x and x++

eric-milles commented on pull request #1299: URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/1299#issuecomment-653972404 To merge into Groovy 2.5, you would also need: https://github.com/apache/groovy/commit/8c0c5b018805fcab7217f5cdc784fc88354cfb15,