LGTM! On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification. I’ve made some changes based on your > feedback. > > Please let me know if you spot any more. > > Thanks! > Remko > > (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info > > On May 29, 2018, at 12:25, Paul King <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 9:43 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Paul, >> >> I’ll change “annotating properties” to “annotating fields”. >> > > I was suggesting the other way around. Field-like declarations in Groovy > without an explicit visibility modifier are properties. That's what your > examples show. > > >> About “getter methods for interfaces” and “setter methods for >> implementation classes”, I need to think about this some more but the >> distinction is important. >> >> The annotations can be a bit “magic” for users who don’t know the details >> of what happens under the hood. >> >> Without clear documentation users may try to use the annotations on the >> “getter” method of an implementation class. >> >> I’ll try to improve the wording but the analogy with JavaBeans is >> actually helpful rather than confusing, I think. Why do you think this >> analogy should be avoided? >> > > Other people may have a different understanding but I normally see setters > as the term used for methods like setFoo, setBar, setBaz, etc. So that's > exactly what we want it to mean for implementation classes. The setters > will be there either explicitly or for all non readonly properties which > will have automatic setters. > > The term "getters" is for methods like getFoo, getBar, getBaz etc. The > interfaces you are showing don't have such methods, e.g. help(), users(), > remaining(). There aren't setters, just interface methods. > > Paul. > > > >> >> Remko >> >> (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info >> >> On May 29, 2018, at 4:11, Paul King <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Looks great! >> >> Two minor points (and they are possibly flaws that also exist in the >> Groovy doco - I haven't checked): >> * I wouldn't use the term "getter methods of an interface", I'd just use >> "methods of an interface". To avoid confusion with getter methods of >> JavaBean style classes. >> * I would use "annotating properties or setter methods" rather than >> "annotating fields or setter methods" >> >> Cheers, Paul. >> >> >> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:03 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> I polished the Groovy 2.5 CliBuilder article some more >>> (https://github.com/remkop/picocli/wiki/Groovy-2.5-CliBuilder-Renewal ). >>> >>> Feedback (positive or negative) would be great. >>> >>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:40 PM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I finished a first draft of an article on Groovy 2.5 CliBuilder >>>> (https://github.com/remkop/picocli/wiki/Groovy-2.5-CliBuilder-Renewal). >>>> >>>> I plan to publish this on DZone and Java Code Geeks when complete. >>>> >>>> I'd appreciate your feedback and suggestions for improvement! >>>> >>>> Remko >>>> >>> >>> >> >
