[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-11366?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Eric Milles updated GROOVY-11366:
---------------------------------
Description:
GROOVY-5881, GROOVY-6324, GROOVY-9418
Consider the following:
{code:groovy}
abstract class A {
Closure func = { x -> x }
}
class C extends A {
Closure proc = { -> }
@CompileStatic test() {
func(123)
proc()
}
}
print(new C().test())
{code}
STC is happy with "proc()" but errors on "func(123)". If a variable expression
can be called without ".call" it should not matter the source of the variable.
Both method call expressions work fine without STC.
was:
GROOVY-5881, GROOVY-6324, GROOVY-9418
Consider the following:
{code:groovy}
abstract class A {
Closure func = { x -> x }
}
class C extends A {
Closure proc = { -> }
@CompileStatic test() {
func(123)
proc()
}
}
print(new C().test())
{code}
STC is happy with "proc()" but errors on "func(123)". If a variable expression
can be called without ".call" it should not matter the source of the variable.
> STC: callable (closure) property from super class
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-11366
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-11366
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Static Type Checker
> Affects Versions: 3.0.21, 5.0.0-alpha-8, 4.0.21
> Reporter: Eric Milles
> Priority: Major
>
> GROOVY-5881, GROOVY-6324, GROOVY-9418
> Consider the following:
> {code:groovy}
> abstract class A {
> Closure func = { x -> x }
> }
> class C extends A {
> Closure proc = { -> }
> @CompileStatic test() {
> func(123)
> proc()
> }
> }
> print(new C().test())
> {code}
> STC is happy with "proc()" but errors on "func(123)". If a variable
> expression can be called without ".call" it should not matter the source of
> the variable. Both method call expressions work fine without STC.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
