Yeah, a nice example with with{}!
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Cédric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I would say +1 to ?= . There are a few cases where I would have used it.
> Typically, configuring some defaults after the fact. I'm not saying this is
> a good pattern in general, but it can come handy:
>
> void finalize(Config config) {
> config.with {
> foo ?= 'foo'
> bar ?= 'bar'
> baz ?= 'baz'
> }
> }
>
> 2016-11-23 9:12 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com>:
>
>> At least between ||= and ?=, the latter, ?=, definitely make most sense
>> for Groovy.
>> Whether it's safe navigation with ?. or Elvis with ?:, we're still in the
>> same realm of nullability and Groovy Truth.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jochen,
>>>
>>> ?= is similar with *=, +=, etc in their usage, and they are all for
>>> convenience and readability. So if ?= does not make sense, why others does?
>>> :-P
>>>
>>> a = a * 2
>>> a *= 2
>>>
>>> a = a ?: 2
>>> a ?= 2
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel.Sun
>>>
>>> --- 原始邮件 ---
>>>
>>> 发件人： "Jochen Theodorou [via Groovy]" <ml-node+[hidden email]
>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736906&i=0>>
>>> 已发： 2016年11月23日 上午12:47
>>> 收件人： "Daniel Sun" <[hidden email]
>>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736906&i=1>>
>>> 主题： Re: [PROPOSAL]new operator ?=
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22.11.2016 15:25, Guillaume Laforge wrote:
>>> > It's a feature that's often be requested.
>>> > I think Ruby's got an equivalent with ||=, and it's often the
>>> reference
>>> > people give when exploring our Elvis operator coming from a ruby
>>> > background in particular.
>>> > I've had several opportunities where I could've used this operator.
>>> > It might make for a nice addition.
>>>
>>> while I agree that ||= is more like what ruby offers we have the
>>> problem, that for Groovy a||b always will be evaluated as boolean.
>>>
>>> In fact first we apply groovy truth to a and if that is not true, we do
>>> the same for b and if that is not true we return false, otherwise true.
>>> Which means a = a||b would not be equal to a ||= b if that is supposed
>>> to be the same as proposed for ?=.
>>>
>>> What would come near to that is |, which is mapped to a method call to
>>> "or". And then again, it has already a meaning for numbers, that does
>>> not fit.
>>>
>>> So for me a new operator makes more sense. But frankly...
>>>
>>> > def foo(x) {
>>> > return x ?: "empty"
>>> > }
>>>
>>> or even
>>>
>>> > def foo(x) {
>>> > x = x ?: "empty"
>>> > return x
>>> > }
>>>
>>> vs.
>>>
>>> > def foo(x) {
>>> > x ?= "empty"
>>> > return x
>>> > }
>>>
>>> Is that really worth it? Does it really improve readability that much?
>>> Or maybe someone has a better example?
>>>
>>> it is different for !in and !instanceof, because of the spacing and
>>> because you may have them in complex expressions. But ?= is a statement
>>> and I would very much dislike this usage as expression.
>>>
>>> For now I am -1 on this
>>>
>>> bye Jochen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
>>> below:
>>> http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-new-operator-tp5
>>> 736886p5736900.html
>>> To unsubscribe from [PROPOSAL]new operator ?=, click here.
>>> NAML
>>> <http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> View this message in context: 回复： Re: [PROPOSAL]new operator ?=
>>> <http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Re-PROPOSAL-new-operator-tp5736906.html>
>>>
>>> Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive
>>> <http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Dev-f372993.html> at
>>> Nabble.com.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Guillaume Laforge
>> Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
>> Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform
>>
>> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
>> Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
>>
>
>
--
Guillaume Laforge
Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President
Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform
Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
