consider adding neater syntax for getters/setters maybe using closure-like syntax

Details

  • Type: Wish Wish
  • Status: Closed Closed
  • Priority: Major Major
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • Affects Version/s: None
  • Fix Version/s: 1.1-beta-1
  • Component/s: None
  • Labels:
    None

Description

Consider something like

Foo foo {
get { return x }
set { x = it }
}

Issue Links

is depended upon by

Task - A task that needs to be done. GROOVY-762 implement syntax improvements

  • Major - Major loss of function.
  • Closed - The issue is considered finished, the resolution is correct. Issues which are not closed can be reopened.

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
Bart van der Werf added a comment -

I wrote something similar for the Pluk language.
Syntax is basicly.

<modifiers> <type> <name>
get (<statement>|<expression>)
set (<statement>|<expression>)

get can return via its expression, or if its a statement via return
set has a readonly variable value which holds the value it was passed

set might be defined before get

one of the two should be specified, if no get/set is specified its read/write-only.

Show
Bart van der Werf added a comment - I wrote something similar for the Pluk language. Syntax is basicly. <modifiers> <type> <name> get (<statement>|<expression>) set (<statement>|<expression>) get can return via its expression, or if its a statement via return set has a readonly variable value which holds the value it was passed set might be defined before get one of the two should be specified, if no get/set is specified its read/write-only.
Hide
Permalink
Paul King added a comment -

Seems to be superseded by current property syntax and features.

Show
Paul King added a comment - Seems to be superseded by current property syntax and features.

People

  • Assignee:
    Unassigned
    Reporter:
    james strachan
Vote (2)
Watch (0)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated:
    Resolved: