groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org>
Subject Re: .with() variant that returns the original object
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2016 18:44:50 GMT
On 09.11.2016 14:56, Winnebeck, Jason wrote:
> My concern about "withThis" is that it implies that "this" is the parameter of the closure
and not the return. We have for example withReader, withWriter, withOutputStream, etc. Those
all imply that the parameter is the reader, the writer, the output stream. So in my mind,
withThis tells me nothing at all about the fact that the original object is returned. withThis
would not be consistent with the rest of Groovy.

I agree with this one.

> .with(returnThis:true) not only has runtime overhead, but keep in mind we are comparing
this to the current state today, which is .with { return this }, or .with { this } depending
on your style.

here I have to correct a bit though. Just want to avoid we start 
discussing the wrong thing... And I just noticed Paul made the very same 
mistake in the original post already. Well, maybe not too late yet

we are talking about

foo.with {
   return foo
}

or

foo.with {
  return it
}

not about something returning "this" at any point. "return this" would 
return neither the open block, nor foo, it would be the enclosing class 
instance. No delegate has influence about any explicit this ever.

Ah, and I did just see Jason noticed it in a later mail... well, maybe 
saying it two times is better ;)

Anyway, that´s why I think withThis and with(returnThis:true) are not 
good variants.

Also it should be noted that we already have an alias for "with", which 
is "identity". I would not want to have yet another one.

Frankly... I think we should change what it returns. It is unlikely 
somebody did depend on with returning null.

bye Jochen

Mime
View raw message