Great, excited, 2.5 really has a lot of really good stuff :-) -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------Von: Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au> Datum: 30.05.18 05:59 (GMT+01:00) An: dev@groovy.apache.org Betreff: Re: Groovy 2.5 CliBuilder article (request for feedback) I have started the release process. I expect it to take a couple of hours. I am hoping to be finished by the official start of the conference 9 am Copenhagen time. Cheers, Paul. On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: Paul, I’ve prepared a blog post on http://blogs.apache.org with the contents of this article. (DZone etc will follow later.) I understand that you want to announce Groovy 2.5 during gr8conf. I will try to sync the timing of the publication of the blog post with your announcement. Can you give me a date and time? Cheers,Remko On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 15:34 Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: Cool!Thanks again!
Remko On May 29, 2018, at 14:26, Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au> wrote: LGTM! On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks for the clarification. I’ve made some changes based on your feedback. Please let me know if you spot any more. Thanks!Remko (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info On May 29, 2018, at 12:25, Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au> wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 9:43 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: Paul, I’ll change “annotating properties” to “annotating fields”. I was suggesting the other way around. Field-like declarations in Groovy without an explicit visibility modifier are properties. That's what your examples show. About “getter methods for interfaces” and “setter methods for implementation classes”, I need to think about this some more but the distinction is important. The annotations can be a bit “magic” for users who don’t know the details of what happens under the hood. Without clear documentation users may try to use the annotations on the “getter” method of an implementation class. I’ll try to improve the wording but the analogy with JavaBeans is actually helpful rather than confusing, I think. Why do you think this analogy should be avoided? Other people may have a different understanding but I normally see setters as the term used for methods like setFoo, setBar, setBaz, etc. So that's exactly what we want it to mean for implementation classes. The setters will be there either explicitly or for all non readonly properties which will have automatic setters. The term "getters" is for methods like getFoo, getBar, getBaz etc. The interfaces you are showing don't have such methods, e.g. help(), users(), remaining(). There aren't setters, just interface methods. Paul. Remko (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info On May 29, 2018, at 4:11, Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au> wrote: Looks great! Two minor points (and they are possibly flaws that also exist in the Groovy doco - I haven't checked):* I wouldn't use the term "getter methods of an interface", I'd just use "methods of an interface". To avoid confusion with getter methods of JavaBean style classes.* I would use "annotating properties or setter methods" rather than "annotating fields or setter methods" Cheers, Paul. On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:03 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: All, I polished the Groovy 2.5 CliBuilder article some more(https://github.com/remkop/picocli/wiki/Groovy-2.5-CliBuilder-Renewal ). Feedback (positive or negative) would be great. On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi everyone, I finished a first draft of an article on Groovy 2.5 CliBuilder(https://github.com/remkop/picocli/wiki/Groovy-2.5-CliBuilder-Renewal). I plan to publish this on DZone and Java Code Geeks when complete. I'd appreciate your feedback and suggestions for improvement! Remko
