Why not use "public <V> V withSql(java.util.functional.Function<groovy.sql.Sql,
V> fn)" in this case? @ClosureParams and @DelegatesTo are usable in Java code
as well. And they cover a whole range of cases besides 1:1 mapping. There are
a number of SAM types that can be used instead of Closure and you can also
define your own.
________________________________
From: Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2019 7:46 PM
To: d...@groovy.incubator.apache.org
Subject: About polish the generics type syntax for closure
Hi all
I've been developing a project with Groovy 3. When I try to specify
the generics type for closure, I have to use annotation..., which is quite
verbose... e.g.
```
public <V> V withSql(@ClosureParams(value= SimpleType.class,
options="groovy.sql.Sql") Closure<V> closure)
```
I propose make the above code groovier, e.g.
```
public <V> V withSql(Closure<groovy.sql.Sql -> V> closure)
```
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Daniel.Sun
--
Sent from:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com_Groovy-2DDev-2Df372993.html&d=DwICAg&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=tPJuIuL_GkTEazjQW7vvl7mNWVGXn3yJD5LGBHYYHww&m=DFJTyfeM1ifwZi7jWOJzHk2DUeAJqD75ON_ZAz6ArbQ&s=lS5nCK2jlmIDPsVhuCRmcbD4HEHI-hx5ZaBqznfDl34&e=
