Parrot has to trade off parsing performance against friendly error message...
but we have been trying to tweak error messages.
Cheers,
Daniel Sun
On 2021/04/29 15:55:52, OCsite wrote:
> Christopher,
>
> > On 29 Apr 2021, at 16:57, Christopher Smith wrote:
> > Parrot has reduced my frustration
Sure, there are some glitches still, but that's why I said that even so
it's a net boost, and I have been using it exclusively since I had the
choice.
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 10:56 OCsite wrote:
> Christopher,
>
> On 29 Apr 2021, at 16:57, Christopher Smith wrote:
> Parrot has reduced my frustrat
ANTLR provides reasonably good error messages most of the time, but
sometimes you have to tweak error handling a bit (in this case, searching
for some more meaningful context to report), and/or refactor the grammar in
a way that causes error reports to be more accurate.
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 17:5
Christopher,
> On 29 Apr 2021, at 16:57, Christopher Smith wrote:
> Parrot has reduced my frustration levels about 15% across the board
did it indeed? Weird. In my case, the very opposite is true; compare please
e.g. the problem outlined below (which applies in 3.0.8 just as well) — it
makes f
gt; list.collect(this.&miltiplier.curry(2))
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milles, Eric (TR Technology)
> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 12:07 PM
> To: dev@groovy.apache.org
> Subject: RE: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
>
> It is best IMO to ope
021 9:37 AM
To: dev@groovy.apache.org
Subject: Re: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
Yup, those workarounds are effective, but they essentially consist in wrapping
the cheap functional interface into an expensive closure even when there's no
value-add. The inverse approach of defini
t; Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 12:07 PM
> To: dev@groovy.apache.org
> Subject: RE: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
>
> It is best IMO to open a JIRA ticket first so that discussion and metadata
> can be tracked. Beyond that, opening a pull request on github with a lin
nal Message-
From: Milles, Eric (TR Technology)
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 12:07 PM
To: dev@groovy.apache.org
Subject: RE: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
It is best IMO to open a JIRA ticket first so that discussion and metadata can
be tracked. Beyond that, opening a pull
hange first.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Smith
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 11:36 AM
To: dev@groovy.apache.org
Subject: Re: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
My case for `with` and `tap` is that in both cases they're immensely useful as
general pipeline operations,
t; I think it would probably be best to submit one JIRA ticket for each group of
> methods. That is, one for "collect", one for "findAll", etc. So we can
> break the problem down and test things a little at a time.
>
>
>
> From: Christopher Smith
> Sent:
or "findAll", etc. So we can break
the problem down and test things a little at a time.
From: Christopher Smith
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 11:02 AM
To: dev@groovy.apache.org
Subject: Re: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
The "side by side" approach is my secon
to use Java streams if you want a
> lambda/method reference friendly API. There is an ticket in JIRA about
> making streams a bit more "groovy":
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-10026
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Smith
> Se
JIRA about making
streams a bit more "groovy": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-10026
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Smith
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 6:37 PM
To: dev@groovy.apache.org
Subject: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
Since Paul is now t
On 28.04.21 03:43, Christopher Smith wrote:
This would be both expensive and problematic with static mode, which is
what I use almost exclusively for production code.
On Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 20:26 Remi Forax mailto:fo...@univ-mlv.fr>> wrote:
[...]
It may be simpler to have a conversion from
Mercredi 28 Avril 2021 01:37:14
> > Objet: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
>
> > Since Paul is now threatening us with a 4.0 beta, I wanted to float an
> > idea that I've been thinking over for a bit now that might be best to
> > add there (though maybe it
- Mail original -
> De: "Christopher Smith"
> À: "dev"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 28 Avril 2021 01:37:14
> Objet: GDK retrofit for Java functional interfaces
> Since Paul is now threatening us with a 4.0 beta, I wanted to float an
> idea that I've bee
Since Paul is now threatening us with a 4.0 beta, I wanted to float an
idea that I've been thinking over for a bit now that might be best to
add there (though maybe it would be okay in 3 still, with the Java 8
baseline).
A large number of the GDK extension methods (particularly stuff like
`with`,
17 matches
Mail list logo
