On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:16 AM, Graeme Rocher <graeme.roc...@gmail.com> wrote: > In agreement with everyone else here. > > +1 to !in and !instanceof > -1 to everything else
Same for me. I am undecided about sticky or not (allowing a space) but easier to be conservative and loosen later. I'm -1 for 'as' (no one has proposed it but another of our operators) and probably 'is' too. If we do is, I don't see why we wouldn't do it for all methods (that return boolean), e.g. assert 'a'.!isUpperCase() and I am a little hesitant about such a notation. Paul. > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> OK. I see :) >> >> >> >> 在 Cédric Champeau [via Groovy] <ml-node+[hidden email]>，2016年11月18日 >> 下午9:18写道： >> >> I agree with Jochen and Guillaume: +1 to !instanceof and !in, but I don't >> like the other variants. >> >> 2016-11-18 14:11 GMT+01:00 Daniel Sun <[hidden email]>: >>> >>> Hi Jochen, >>> >>> > I think !instanceof and !in are ok. The others... not sure here. Right >>> > now a*=b, which means !< is >=. And in this >>> > case I actually prefer >=. >>> >>> Sometimes we write code like "!(a > b)", now we can write "a !> b" >>> instead, which is much close to our mind :) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Daniel.Sun >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Negative-relational-operators-for-Groovy-3-tp5736809p5736816.html >>> Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion >> below: >> http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Negative-relational-operators-for-Groovy-3-tp5736809p5736817.html >> To unsubscribe from Negative relational operators for Groovy 3, click here. >> NAML >> >> >> ________________________________ >> View this message in context: Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3 >> Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > -- > Graeme Rocher
