Re: Named Parameters Support

I have used a lot of languages over the years, but I don't do Puppet in our team, so have not used Ruby myself, and have never programmed in Smalltalk. Could you elaborate on what named parameter features from Ruby/Smalltalk you had in mind ? On 23.07.2017 01:00, Charles Monteiro wrote: How

Re: [VOTE]About the Union Type for method/constructor declaration

I would be leaning towards -1 without further justification. Even though I don't think we want to rush into union types in Groovy, wouldn't this syntax rule out us having it down the track? Cheers, Paul. On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Daniel Sun wrote: > Hi all, > >

Re: Named Parameters Support

How about the same support as languages like Ruby and Smalltalk provide ? On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 5:17 PM MG wrote: > Hi, > > having recently explained why Groovy is my language of choice got me > thinking about the few areas of Groovy where I personally wish for / see > the

[VOTE]About the Union Type for method/constructor declaration

Hi all, I've been thinking about Union Type for method/constructor declaration. It is similar to multi-catch in try-catch statement, e.g. class UnionTypeSample { public UnionTypeSample(A|B|C p) { // do something } def m(D|E p) { // do something } } Groovy will

Named Parameters Support

Hi, having recently explained why Groovy is my language of choice got me thinking about the few areas of Groovy where I personally wish for / see the potential for improvement during my daily development tasks. I will start off with named paramters support, a topic that has been moving more

Re: One Language to Rule Them All ?

Thanks, Paul! mg On 22.07.2017 02:35, Paul King wrote: Nice!