groovy

Better error messages when using Java's array init syntax

Details

  • Type: Sub-task Sub-task
  • Status: Open Open
  • Priority: Minor Minor
  • Resolution: Unresolved
  • Affects Version/s: 1.1-rc-3
  • Fix Version/s: 4.0
  • Component/s: parser-antlr
  • Labels:
    None
  • Number of attachments :
    0

Description

Declaring and populating an array in line such as:

Object[] objArr = new Object[]

{ "a", "b", "d" }

;

causes the following exception:

Exception in thread "main" org.codehaus.groovy.control.MultipleCompilationErrorsException: startup failed, ModelNumberParser.groovy: 7: unexpected token: , @ line 7, column 45

It would be better, especially for Java people just learning Groovy, to say something like "Java initialization syntax not supported, use [x, y, z] as DesiredClass[]."

EDIT: probably filed against a JSR version.

Issue Links

is related to

New Feature - A new feature of the product, which has yet to be developed. GROOVY-3791 Array initializer fails

  • Minor - Minor loss of function, or other problem where easy workaround is present.
  • Open - The issue is open and ready for the assignee to start work on it.

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
blackdrag blackdrag added a comment -

I agree, however it is not so easy to do that, since the compiler thinks it is a closure and the "," doesn't make sense to it.

Show
blackdrag blackdrag added a comment - I agree, however it is not so easy to do that, since the compiler thinks it is a closure and the "," doesn't make sense to it.
Hide
Permalink
Martin C. Martin added a comment -

What about adding a production into the parser? That is, add a "commas inside { }s" construct, whose action is to report an error. Make it triggerable only if no other rule matches. Such error productions are a standard technique, from what I've gathered.

By the way, why is this ambiguous? Can you declare a return type for a closure? If not, what could the interpretation of:

new Foo[]

{ bar }

be if { bar }

is interpreted as a closure?

I've finally started reading GinA, I should have a much more complete knowledge of Groovy soon.

Show
Martin C. Martin added a comment - What about adding a production into the parser? That is, add a "commas inside { }s" construct, whose action is to report an error. Make it triggerable only if no other rule matches. Such error productions are a standard technique, from what I've gathered. By the way, why is this ambiguous? Can you declare a return type for a closure? If not, what could the interpretation of: new Foo[] { bar } be if { bar } is interpreted as a closure? I've finally started reading GinA, I should have a much more complete knowledge of Groovy soon.
Hide
Permalink
Andres Almiray added a comment -

Jochen, I think this may be solved at the same time as the other fixes to the AST code you have been doing lately (definitely just a better error message), pushing this to 1.2 though as it is minor.

Show
Andres Almiray added a comment - Jochen, I think this may be solved at the same time as the other fixes to the AST code you have been doing lately (definitely just a better error message), pushing this to 1.2 though as it is minor.
Hide
Permalink
Paul King added a comment -

possibly related

Show
Paul King added a comment - possibly related

People

  • Assignee:
    Unassigned
    Reporter:
    Martin C. Martin
Vote (0)
Watch (0)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated: