groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Suderman <keisuder...@vassar.edu>
Subject Re: bool
Date Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:51:44 GMT
-1 on all proposals that introduce new keywords that do not have a strong justification and
use case.  The only thing `fin` and `bool` will do is potentially conflict with existing variable/method
names in programs with little other benefit.  One of my biggest pet peeve's with Python is
how they have polluted the namespace with short names I typically use as variable names (dict,
list, etc).  Let's not do this with Groovy.

Just my two cents.
Keith

> On Jul 22, 2018, at 4:57 PM, Jennifer Strater <jenn.strater@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi mg,
> 
> I also don't like the 'fin' proposal, but I could get behind 'bool'. It's shorter but
doesn't lose the meaning. It also makes it easier for people coming from other programming
languages.
> 
> Best,
> Jenn
>  <https://twitter.com/codejennerator>  <https://linkedin.com/in/jennstrater>
> 
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 11:39 PM, MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com <mailto:mgbiz@arscreat.com>>
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> since things are going so well with my "fin" = "final" proposal, I propose that Groovy
support "bool" as a shortcut for "boolean".
> 
> "boolean" is already seeing large scale use by Groovy developers, "bool" instead of "boolean"
saves nearly half of the keyword's characters, "bool" is used in C++, it fits better with
the also widely used "int", and Groovy 3.0 is the ideal opportunity to introduce such language
extensions.
> 
> Cheers,
> mg
> 
> 
> 
> 

----------------------
Keith Suderman
Research Associate
Department of Computer Science
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie NY
suderman@cs.vassar.edu





Mime
View raw message