Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi all, The new parser(Parrot) supports negative relational operators now, which is proposed by Guillaume Laforge :) Here are some example codes(https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/blob/negativeRelationalOperators/src/test/resources/core/NegativeRelationalOperators_01x.groo

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Jochen Theodorou
On 18.11.2016 13:45, Daniel Sun wrote: Hi all, The new parser(Parrot) supports negative relational operators now, which is proposed by Guillaume Laforge :) Here are some example codes(https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/blob/negativeRelationalOperators/src/test/resource

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Jochen Theodorou
On 18.11.2016 13:45, Daniel Sun wrote: Hi all, The new parser(Parrot) supports negative relational operators now, which is proposed by Guillaume Laforge :) Here are some example codes(https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/blob/negativeRelationalOperators/src/test/resource

Re: groovy parsers as subprojecs

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi Jochen, The "I)" variant looks better than other variants, which works fine now. BTW, glad to see you again in the mailing list :) Cheers, Daniel.Sun -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/groovy-parsers-as-subprojecs-tp5736808p5736812.html Sent fro

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi Jochen, > oh... and one question... is "! in" the same as "!in"? Yeah, the negative relational operators are combined operators, which will be transformed to normal NotExpression :) Cheers, Daniel.Sun -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Negative-relatio

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Guillaume Laforge
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > > > On 18.11.2016 13:45, Daniel Sun wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The new parser(Parrot) supports negative relational operators now, >> which is proposed by Guillaume Laforge :) >> >> Here are some example >> codes(https://github.

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Guillaume Laforge
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Guillaume Laforge wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Jochen Theodorou > wrote: > >> >> >> On 18.11.2016 13:45, Daniel Sun wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> The new parser(Parrot) supports negative relational operators now, >>> which is proposed by Guil

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi Jochen, > I think !instanceof and !in are ok. The others... not sure here. Right > now a*=b, which means !< is >=. And in this > case I actually prefer >=. Sometimes we write code like "!(a > b)", now we can write "a !> b" instead, which is much close to our mind :) Cheers, Daniel.

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Cédric Champeau
I agree with Jochen and Guillaume: +1 to !instanceof and !in, but I don't like the other variants. 2016-11-18 14:11 GMT+01:00 Daniel Sun : > Hi Jochen, > > > I think !instanceof and !in are ok. The others... not sure here. Right > > now a*=b, which means !< is >=. And in this > > case I actual

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
OK. As most of us just like !in and !instanceof and prefer the sticky style, I will modify them later. Thanks for your review ;) Cheers, Daniel.Sun 在 "Guillaume Laforge [via Groovy]" ，2016年11月18日 下午9:07写道： On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Guillaume Laforge <[hidden email]> wrote: On Fri, N

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
OK. I see :) 在 Cédric Champeau [via Groovy] ，2016年11月18日 下午9:18写道： I agree with Jochen and Guillaume: +1 to !instanceof and !in, but I don't like the other variants. 2016-11-18 14:11 GMT+01:00 Daniel Sun <[hidden email]>: Hi Jochen, > I think !instanceof and !in are ok. The others... not s

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Graeme Rocher
In agreement with everyone else here. +1 to !in and !instanceof -1 to everything else Cheers On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Daniel Sun wrote: > OK. I see :) > > > > 在 Cédric Champeau [via Groovy] ，2016年11月18日 > 下午9:18写道： > > I agree with Jochen and Guillaume: +1 to !instanceof and !in, but I

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Remi Forax
- Mail original - > De: "Graeme Rocher" > À: dev@groovy.apache.org > Cc: d...@groovy.incubator.apache.org > Envoyé: Vendredi 18 Novembre 2016 15:16:04 > Objet: Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3 > In agreement with everyone else here. > > +1 to !in and !instanceof > -1 to e

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Sergei Egorov
How about is and !is ? Would be nice to have them :) On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:53 PM Remi Forax wrote: > > > - Mail original - > > De: "Graeme Rocher" > > À: dev@groovy.apache.org > > Cc: d...@groovy.incubator.apache.org > > Envoyé: Vendredi 18 Novembre 2016 15:16:04 > > Objet: Re: Nega

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Guillaume Laforge
Yeah, is is currently the method is(), not an operator. But might be a good addition too. On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Sergei Egorov wrote: > How about is and !is ? Would be nice to have them :) > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:53 PM Remi Forax wrote: > >> >> >> - Mail original - >> >

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Paul King
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:16 AM, Graeme Rocher wrote: > In agreement with everyone else here. > > +1 to !in and !instanceof > -1 to everything else Same for me. I am undecided about sticky or not (allowing a space) but easier to be conservative and loosen later. I'm -1 for 'as' (no one has propo

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Remi Forax
Perhaps only on method reference, filter (Objects!::isNull) ? Remi On November 18, 2016 4:10:24 PM GMT+01:00, Paul King wrote: >On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:16 AM, Graeme Rocher > wrote: >> In agreement with everyone else here. >> >> +1 to !in and !instanceof >> -1 to everything else > >Same for

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Andres Almiray
!:: you say? now that's something I can grok :-) If method references are "similar" to Groovy's MethodClosures, would the addition of !:: imply the addition of !.& ? --- Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast http://jroller.com/aalmiray http://www.linkedin.com/in

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Jochen Theodorou
On 18.11.2016 14:11, Daniel Sun wrote: Hi Jochen, I think !instanceof and !in are ok. The others... not sure here. Right now a*=b, which means !< is >=. And in this case I actually prefer >=. Sometimes we write code like "!(a > b)", now we can write "a !> b" instead, which is much c

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Jochen Theodorou
On 18.11.2016 15:52, Remi Forax wrote: - Mail original - De: "Graeme Rocher" À: dev@groovy.apache.org Cc: d...@groovy.incubator.apache.org Envoyé: Vendredi 18 Novembre 2016 15:16:04 Objet: Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3 In agreement with everyone else here. +1 to

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Guillaume Laforge
Without joking: let's remember that we don't want Groovy to become ASCII-art like other languages... On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > > > On 18.11.2016 15:52, Remi Forax wrote: > >> >> >> - Mail original - >> >>> De: "Graeme Rocher" >>> À: dev@groovy.apache.org

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi Guillaume, === and !=== are available for Groovy 3, so "!is" is not necessary. Currently only "!in" and "!instanceof" are supported with sticky style: https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/commit/69023a63446d14add54f43d3d7797c9dd2a7f903 If it is ok, I'll merge it into par

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Interesting, haha :) -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Negative-relational-operators-for-Groovy-3-tp5736809p5736831.html Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Guillaume Laforge
Ok, great! On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Daniel Sun wrote: > Hi Guillaume, > > === and !=== are available for Groovy 3, so "!is" is not necessary. > > Currently only "!in" and "!instanceof" are supported with sticky style: > https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/commit/ > 690

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Paolo Di Tommaso
+1 On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > > I think !instanceof and !in are ok. The others... not sure here. Right now > a=b, which means !< is >=. And in this case I > actually prefer >=. > > bye Jochen >

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
> === and !=== are available for Groovy 3, so "!is" is not necessary. The identity operators should be === and !==:) Cheers, Daniel.Sun -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Negative-relational-operators-for-Groovy-3-tp5736809p5736834.html Sent from the

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi Jochen, I've modified the implementation according to your suggestions that ONLY support !in and !instanceof with sticky style. In addition, !in and !instanceof are REAL operators now(https://github.com/danielsun1106/groovy-parser/commit/87e2c41763422a6642414028d84efdccb90bfcda) I'll

Re: Negative relational operators for Groovy 3

2016-11-18 Thread Daniel Sun
Hi Jochen, > "a !&& b" for a nand instead of "!(a && b)" or instead of "!a || !b" > then there is also ~& and !& Looks good. They've been added to my TODO list :) Cheers, Daniel.Sun -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Negative-relational-operators-for-Groovy