groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MG <mg...@arscreat.com>
Subject Re: @AutoFinal(enabled=false) ?
Date Mon, 09 Oct 2017 00:42:27 GMT
Hi Paul,

a temporal refactoring argument - good point.

But you could also temporarily enable AutoFinal for a project and start 
fixing the spots which do not compile, and only when you are finished (I 
would actually expect this to take much less time than switiching a 
project to CompileStatic, since the fixes are much more trivial), 
permanently turn on AutoFinal for the whole project. I think my argument 
still applies here: AutoFinal is useful, when you can trust that it is 
active everywhere. If you are not worried about that, there is no need 
for you to use final anywhere (be it automatic or explicit) in the first 
place. That is why I suggested a compiler switch in the beginning 
(though I get and accept why that was rejected).

"Doing things the same as in other parts of Groovy" is of course an 
argument that generally does make sense. "Least surprise" with regard to 
interfaces... ;-)

KR,
Markus



On 09.10.2017 01:16, Paul King wrote:
> My inclination would be that if you are going to have a disable option 
> at the method/constructor level, then I'd also enable it at the class 
> level. Imagine inheriting a large Groovy code base and you want to 
> migrate it towards have auto finals. With a class level option you 
> could enable it globally with a configscript and selectively disable 
> on classes that you haven't got around to "fixing" to comply with the 
> stricter style yet. As you start working on a class you might move it 
> from the class level to just the violating methods/constructors and 
> then eventually remove all once you have completed the conversion 
> process. We have the same kind of approach in place for CompileStatic.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 5:58 AM, MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com 
> <mailto:mgbiz@arscreat.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Groovy users,
>
>     we are putting the final touches (no pun intended) on the Groovy
>     @AutoFinal annotation. The intended use is to apply the annotation
>     automatically to all project classes (see e.g.
>     http://mrhaki.blogspot.co.at/2016/01/groovy-goodness-customising-groovy.html
>     <http://mrhaki.blogspot.co.at/2016/01/groovy-goodness-customising-groovy.html>),
>     thereby making all parameters anywhere in the project code final
>     without the need to clutter the code with final keywords in
>     parameter lists.
>
>     The question is, if there should be support to disable the
>     annotation selectively for e.g. a class or method. I personally
>     think that disabling it for a class violates the principle of
>     least surprise, but am not as sure for methods. So the question
>     is, can anyone come up with a good example where disabling
>     @AutoFinal selectively would make sense ?
>     (Note: "So I can assign a value to a parameter" for me does not
>     constitute such an example, since in that case one can just define
>     a local, non-final variable and assign the parameter to it).
>
>     Cheers,
>     mg
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message