groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au>
Subject Re: JDK 10: Use of var over def?
Date Sun, 25 Mar 2018 13:19:00 GMT
For the majority of cases, you will be able to conceptually think of it as
if the declaration type of the LHS is the inferred type of the RHS.
Until we have thought about non-denotable types etc. a bit more, I don't
want to preempt whether a more sophisticated conceptual model will
sometimes be needed.
Also, note that it isn't Object in your example but SomeTestClass$1 or
something like that.

Cheers, Paul.

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:30 AM, MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com> wrote:

> There is no "var" in my example because it is currently valid Groovy code,
> so I already had to do the var -> typeof(RHS) substitution in the line
> "SonOfFoo f = new SonOfFoo(21)". I maybe should have made that more
> explicit :-)
> The reason I used currently valid Groovy was, that the point I am trying
> to make is: Why should var not just become typeof(RHS), while all the rest
> stays the same ? That should give us Java-like type safety, with some added
> Groovy goodness...
>
> Your example as currently working Groovy (JUnit) code through only
> replacing var with its RHS type:
>
> static class Main {}
> @Test@Ignore@CompileStaticvoid main() {
>   // mg: was "var x = new Object() {"  Object x = new Object() {
>     public void myMethod() { System.out.println(new Date()); }
>   };
>   x.myMethod(); // okay because the inferred type is the AIC  // mg: Was "var y = new
Main();"  Main y = new Main();
>   y = new Main() { // reassignment okay because new type is subclass of inferred type
   public void myMethod() { System.out.println(new Date());}
>   };
>
>   // mg: Works  y.myMethod(); // <=== error: cannot find symbol  // mg: If commented
in, fails (as expected) with "Cannot assign value of type Integer to variable of type Main"
   //y = new Integer(3); // <=== error: incompatible types: Integer cannot be converted
to Main}
>
> Cheers,
> mg
>
>
>
>
> On 24.03.2018 13:08, Paul King wrote:
>
> I don't see a var in your example?
>
> Basically, we can use def and have flow typing (which would be the
> behavior if we make var always an alias for def) or we can behave like Java:
>
> // Java
> import java.util.Date;
>
> public class Main {
> public static void main(String[] args) {
> var x = new Object() {
> public void myMethod() { System.out.println(new Date());}
> };
> x.myMethod(); // okay because the inferred type is the AIC
> var y = new Main();
> y = new Main() { // reassignment okay because new type is subclass of
> inferred type
> public void myMethod() { System.out.println(new Date());}
> };
>
> // y.myMethod(); // <=== error: cannot find symbol
>               // symbol: method myMethod()
>               // location: variable y of type Main
>
> // y = new Integer(3); // <=== error: incompatible types: Integer cannot
> be converted to Main
> }
> }
>
> which effectively means that we infer as we do now but no flow typing.
> Conceptually, you may think that in the above Java example that var y has
> type Main (typeof RHS) but that isn't reflected in the bytecode in the same
> way that a type for a field or parameter would be reflected, so it's much
> more a concept that the compiler knows about rather than a concept that the
> bytecode knows about. Currently flow typing allows both the above "error"
> lines to succeed. But to behave like Java, we need both to fail.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 3:14 AM, MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> wouldn't it make sense to combine flow typing with  var x = RHS  being
>> identical to  typeof(RHS) x = RHS  :
>>
>> @Canonicalstatic class Foo {
>>   int x}
>> @InheritConstructorsstatic class SonOfFoo extends Foo {
>>   int sonOfFooMethod() { 2*x }
>> }
>>
>> @Test@Ignore@CompileStaticvoid flowTypedVar() {
>>   SonOfFoo f = new SonOfFoo(21)
>>   //f = new Foo(-1) // compile time fails with "Groovyc: [Static type checking] -
Cannot assign value of type groovy.GroovyGeneralSpike$Foo to variable of type groovy.GroovyGeneralSpike$SonOfFoo"
 //f.sonOfFooMethod()   // compile time fails with "Groovyc: [Static type checking] - Cannot
find matching method groovy.GroovyGeneralSpike$Foo#sonOfFooMethod()."  if(f instanceof SonOfFoo)
{
>>     println f.sonOfFooMethod()  // works because of flow typing  }
>> }
>>
>> Cheers,
>> mg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23.03.2018 15:42, Paul King wrote:
>>
>> The Parrot parser already has support for this at the grammar level but
>> we regard some of the current implementation details as experimental.
>>
>> At the moment it is almost just an alias for "def" but discussions have
>> been around whether we can make the behavior closer to Java when used
>> within static Groovy code. We haven't defined exactly what this would mean
>> yet but roughly I suspect it could mean the same inferencing as now but
>> without flow typing.
>>
>> Cheers, Paul.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Merlin Beedell <MBeedell@cryoserver.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I see that the newly release JDK 10 now supports the “var” declaration
>>> for local variables where the type can clearly be inferred from its
>>> initialiser:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/286
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I note that Groovy’s “def” syntax (among others) was mentioned but
>>> rejected.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Would Groovy move to support this syntax in the same way (support ‘var’
>>> only for Type Safe inferred declarations) or as a general alias to the
>>> “def” keyword?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> JDK 10 also has support for “docker” containers.  The ecosystem has
>>> certainly shifted!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Merlin Beedell
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message