This is a feature I could see myself using immediately, so +1 from my side.
Maybe call it "Intersection Types" or "Common Denominator Types", to
seperate it from much more complex type pattern matching support ?
Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> schrieb am So., 23. Juli 2017, 00:28:
> 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 translate the above code into the following code, which
> is
> also the same way how multi-catch is handled.
>
> class UnionTypeSample {
> public UnionTypeSample(A p) {
> // do something
> }
>
> public UnionTypeSample(B p) {
> // do something
> }
>
> public UnionTypeSample(C p) {
> // do something
> }
>
> def m(D p) {
> // do something
> }
>
> def m(E p) {
> // do something
> }
> }
>
> Any thoughts?
> ----------------------------------
> [+1] I like it
> [ 0] Not bad
> [-1] I do not like it
> ----------------------------------
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.Sun
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-About-the-Union-Type-for-method-constructor-declaration-tp5742265.html
> Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
