Also it gives more flexibility in terms of DSLs people can write.
You can create your own control structures that look like built-in ones.
For instance imagine you want to have an "unless" pseudo-statement, you
could write it like that:
void unless(boolean b, Closure body) { if (!b) body() }
and be able to call it like an "if" statement:
unless(condition) {
// do something
}
which is indeed equivalent to:
unless(condition, { /* do something */ })
Guillaume
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Søren Berg Glasius <soe...@glasius.dk>
wrote:
> Hi Alessio,
>
> It's not a problem to use the closure like this:
>
> sql.eachRow('select * from PROJECT where name=:foo', [foo:'Gradle'], {
> // process row
> })
>
> it is simply a matter of how you place your parentesees
>
> When you use closures with collections you would offen omit the
> parentheses all together:
>
> collection.each {
> // do something with it
> }
>
> but writing
>
> collection.each ({
> // do something with it
> })
>
> yields the same result, but is a tiny bit more verbose
>
> Best regards / Med venlig hilsen,
> Søren Berg Glasius
>
> Hedevej 1, Gl. Rye, 8680 Ry, Denmark
> Mobile: +45 40 44 91 88, Skype: sbglasius
> --- Press ESC once to quit - twice to save the changes.
>
> On December 1, 2015 at 17:19:07, alessio (aless...@gmail.com ) wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have just started to dig into Groovy and have been mostly impressed
> by what it offers, however when I had a look at handling database
> calls (http://docs.groovy-lang.org/latest/html/api/groovy/sql/Sql.html)
> I stumbled upon a rather weird syntax
>
> sql.eachRow('select * from PROJECT where name=:foo', [foo:'Gradle']) {
> // process row
> }
>
> Usually I'd say this is a "regular" block scope but in this context it
> was obviously a closure/function pointer/callback. It took me a while
> to dig into this to find out that it can also be passed as second
> argument to the method and was added in 2.2
>
>
> http://www.groovy-lang.org/semantics.html#_calling_a_method_accepting_a_sam_type_with_a_closure
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-6188 (the JSR link does
> not work anymore)
>
> My question now is, why? Apparently pre-2.2 one had to cast the
> closure to the appropriate type. But why making it possible to
> actually define the closure outside of the respective call?
>
> At least for me this is HIGHLY confusing.
>
> Thanks
>
>
--
Guillaume Laforge
Apache Groovy committer & PMC member
Product Ninja & Advocate at Restlet <http://restlet.com>
Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
