[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-11311?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17820629#comment-17820629
]
Jochen Theodorou commented on GROOVY-11311:
-------------------------------------------
>From a dynamic Groovy only perspective the call methods are usually not even
>called for generated closures. Instead we call directly the doCall methods.
>The call methods are just helpers for calls made from Java. So I expect all
>important information to be on them.
>From a static Groovy perspective we know at compile time of course only the
>call methods call(), call(Object) and call(Object[]). They may do dynamic
>method calls to the real doCall methods. Of course this does not provide any
>type safety because for {int i ->i} we have a doCall(int) method, but also a
>call() method, which would fail if called. for {int i=1 ->i} we have of course
>two doCall methods doCall() and doCall(int), now call() is ok. call("foo") or
>call(1,2,3) is of course still not ok and will fail at runtime. We can
>overwrite the call methods to do direct method calls and safe the dynamic
>invocation, but I would still not add the annotation decorators there.
> Groovy Closure not retaining param annotations, but only for the default
> single object param case
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-11311
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-11311
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.0.8, 4.0.4
> Reporter: Val E
> Assignee: Eric Milles
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: ClosureAnnotationsTest.groovy
>
>
> In trying to process Groovy closure param annotations, via Java reflection, I
> realized that there is one narrow case where the param annotations are not
> preserved in the generated call method.
> This happens only for the case of a single Object param type. All other
> variations retain the annotation, it can be a single param of a different
> type, or multiple params of Object type. I think this may have something to
> do with handling the default 'it' param
> ex:
> {code:java}
> {@TESTANNO def x-> } //wont retain @TESTANNO
> {code}
> {code:java}
> {@TESTANNO Object x-> } //wont retain @TESTANNO
> {code}
> {code:java}
> {@TESTANNO Integer x-> } //will retain @TESTANNO
> {code}
> {code:java}
> {@TESTANNO def x, @TESTANNO def y-> }//will retain @TESTANNO on both x and y
> {code}
>
> Attached a basic groovy script to demonstrate.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
