AndresCheers,Assuming "X implies(Y)" would be the convention for => just like "X plus(Y)" is for +, and so on.If the latter then I guess that may not be a proplem.Is the "implies" method supposed to work with Groovy Truth or with booleans only?If the former then this would pose a problem as anyone that has defined an "X implies(Y)" method would have access to =>------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Daniel Sun <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:Hi all,
The "implies" operator "=>" was suggested many years ago, here is the
replated JIRA issue( GROOVY-2576
a/browse/GROOVY-2576> ) .
Do you want it for Groovy 3? (+1: yes; -1: no; 0: not bad)
BTW, recently I have been going through the issues related to the old
parser, many issues existing for many years do not exist in the new parser
View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble
Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.