groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: About simplifying the switch for runtime groovydoc
Date Sun, 28 Oct 2018 07:24:42 GMT
Since it's for Groovy 3.0, and @GroovyDoc hasn't yet been available in an
officially released version, it's still possible to change the syntax at
this time without any harm.


On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 7:40 AM Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Oct 25, 2018, at 21:48, Keith Suderman <suderman@cs.vassar.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2018, at 8:31 PM, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In addition, there is nothing about the long @GroovyDoc notation that
> tells me the doc string is retained at runtime. So it isn’t actually
> clearer...
>
>
> This.  When I first saw @GroovyDoc my initial reaction was, "Of course it
> is GroovyDoc, it is a .groovy file, what else would it be?". I had to
> Google to find the original thread to discover that it was "Runtime
> GroovyDoc".  So I think something like @Runtime would be much clearer and
> informative than @GroovyDoc.
>
> But having said that, I have never said to myself, "I wish I could make
> this GroovyDoc available at runtime." So I would wait to see how the
> annotation is used in the wild before considering shortcuts.
>
>
> I see runtime GroovyDoc to be useful in the next generation of CliBuilder,
> where users could write runtime GroovyDoc documentation that would become
> part of the usage help message of the command line utility.
>
> Allowing users to accomplish this with a /**@ notation seems a lot more
> elegant and Groovier than something relatively heavy-looking like @GroovyDoc
> or the more explicit @RuntimeGroovyDoc.
>
> So let me ask again, do we even need a long notation? Is it possible to
> make the /**@ the public API for this feature _instead of_ @GroovyDoc or
> @RuntimeGroovyDoc?
>
> Remko.
>
>
> My two cents,
> Keith
>
>
> Remko.
>
> (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info
>
> On Oct 24, 2018, at 23:12, Guillaume Laforge <glaforge@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not necessarily. Discussions are better, leading towards a consensus.
> Polls can have very different outcomes depending on how you define the
> questions and answers, how you advertise the poll, how you interpret the
> results of the poll, etc.
> Before any poll, I'd like to hear about those early users of this
> non-released-yet feature, to hear what their thoughts are.
> There's no need to hurry or rush towards adding this shortcut notation.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 3:57 PM Daniel.Sun <sunlan@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Raising a poll may be better way to make decisions ;)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel.Sun
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Daniel Sun
>> Apache Groovy committer
>> Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me
>> Twitter: @daniel_sun
>>
>> --
>> Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Dev-f372993.html
>>
>
>
> --
> Guillaume Laforge
> Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
> Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform
>
> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
> Twitter: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge>
>
>
> ----------------------
> Keith Suderman
> Research Associate
> Department of Computer Science
> Vassar College, Poughkeepsie NY
> suderman@cs.vassar.edu
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Guillaume Laforge
Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform

Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
Twitter: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge>

Mime
View raw message