Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-02-05 Thread Jochen Theodorou
On 04.02.24 17:38, Oscar N wrote: [...] Jochen Theodorou: VMPlugin should not call into SBA or InvokerHelper. Should I be copying over code in that case? Or should it be calling DGM instead? if you have code that is there to produce an unmodifiable list by DGM and that logic of that depends

Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-02-04 Thread Oscar N
its complexity. Best regards, Oscar ________ From: Jochen Theodorou Sent: 27 January 2024 11:38 To: dev@groovy.apache.org Subject: Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294 Hi Oscar, sorry for replying so late, I was very busy this week. On 22.01.24 20:55

Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-01-27 Thread Jochen Theodorou
Hi Oscar, sorry for replying so late, I was very busy this week. On 22.01.24 20:55, Oscar N wrote: Indeed, that is the crux of my earlier questions. I've got it working at runtime, however I'm unsure of which approach to take for compile-time. Adding new `ScriptBytecodeAdapter`/`InvokerHelper`

RE: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-01-23 Thread Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev
From: Oscar N Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 1:56 PM To: dev@groovy.apache.org Subject: [EXT] Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294 External Email: Use caution with links and attachments. Indeed, that is the crux of my earlier questions. I've got it working a

Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-01-22 Thread Oscar N
as simple as one method for all lists on one Java version and another method on a different version. From: Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev Sent: 22 January 2024 18:04 To: dev@groovy.apache.org Subject: RE: Questions regarding implementation approach for GR

RE: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-01-22 Thread Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev
instead of just writing the bytecode you need based on the compile-time target bytecode version? From: Oscar N Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 10:46 AM To: dev@groovy.apache.org Subject: [EXT] Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294 External Email: Use caution with links

Re: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-01-22 Thread Oscar N
t point. I suppose the main benefit is performance-wise again, as the immutable List/Map could be cached. From: Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev Sent: 22 January 2024 16:04 To: dev@groovy.apache.org Subject: RE: Questions regarding implementation approach for GR

RE: Questions regarding implementation approach for GROOVY-11294

2024-01-22 Thread Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev
Can you just wrap what is presently returned with a call to Collections.unmodifiableList or Collections.unmodifiableMap? If the return values of toList() or toMap() from a record do not link to any internal state, what is the concern if they are mutable or not? From: Oscar N Sent: Monday, Jan