gt;
> *From:* MG
> *Sent:* Friday, August 7, 2020 3:37 PM
> *To:* dev@groovy.apache.org; Milles, Eric (TR Technology)
>
> *Subject:* Re: switch destructuring
>
>
>
> Hi eric,
>
> just to make my post clear: I do not desperately need pattern
> matching, but I k
vy should support Java syntax as
> best as possible.
>
>
>
> *From:* MG
> *Sent:* Friday, August 7, 2020 3:37 PM
> *To:* dev@groovy.apache.org; Milles, Eric (TR Technology) <
> eric.mil...@thomsonreuters.com>
> *Subject:* Re: switch destructuring
>
>
>
>
es a gap between
Java and Groovy. And I think Groovy should support Java syntax as best as
possible.
From: MG
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 3:37 PM
To: dev@groovy.apache.org; Milles, Eric (TR Technology)
Subject: Re: switch destructuring
Hi eric,
just to make my post clear: I do not desperat
ancements would cover a lot of common cases. Then we could regroup
and see what sort of edge cases remain and if there is merit in adding
something to help with them.
*From:* MG
*Sent:* Friday, August 7, 2020 12:41 PM
*To:* dev@groovy.apache.org; Paul King
*Subject:* switch destructuring
H
nt.
I agree with Paul that supporting Java's switch expression enhancements would
cover a lot of common cases. Then we could regroup and see what sort of edge
cases remain and if there is merit in adding something to help with them.
From: MG
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2020 12:41 PM
To: dev@
Hi Paul,
the Python destructuring sure looks powerful (I did my master thesis in
Mathematica, which is all about pattern matching).
Here is one of the Python examples in a potential Groovy syntax, which
tries to convert its argument into a 3D-point:
@Newify(pattern=/[A-Z][A-Za-z0-9_]+/)
Poin
