Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 5.0.1

+1 (binding) *Guillaume Laforge* Apache Groovy committer Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud - Blog: glaforge.dev - X: @glaforge - Bluesky: @glaforge.dev - Mastodon: @glafo...@uwyn.net

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 5.0.1

+1On Sep 8, 2025, at 6:13, Søren Berg Glasius wrote:+1 (binding)Den søn. 7. sep. 2025 kl. 22.48 skrev Paul King :Dear development community,I am happy to start the VOTE thread for a Groovy 5.0.1 release!This release includes 11 bug fixes/improvements as outlined in the changel

Re: Ugly inconsistence betw. for and for/in

MG, nobody ever forced you to shadow local variables if you don't like that. You can do whichever of your approaches listed below freely. What's wrong is to force the other people, who consider shadowing a good idea, not to. All the best, OC > On 8. 9. 2025, at 0:08, MG wrote: > > Hi OC, >

Re: Ugly inconsistence betw. for and for/in

Hi OC, @Shadowing local variables is a normal and very reasonable thing which worked perfectly and without a glitch from the Pascal up, or perhaps even Algol, I am not quite sure, it's far far ago :) Forbidding it is wrong, for it prevents e.g. copy/pasting small code snippets which just happ

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 5.0.1

+1 (binding) Den søn. 7. sep. 2025 kl. 22.48 skrev Paul King : > > Dear development community, > > I am happy to start the VOTE thread for a Groovy 5.0.1 release! > > This release includes 11 bug fixes/improvements as outlined in the > changelog: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Release

[VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 5.0.1

Dear development community, I am happy to start the VOTE thread for a Groovy 5.0.1 release! This release includes 11 bug fixes/improvements as outlined in the changelog: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318123&version=12356219 Tag: https://gitbox.apache.org/repo

Re: Ugly inconsistence betw. for and for/in

Jochen, > On 7. 9. 2025, at 13:05, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > On 05.09.25 18:10, OCsite wrote: > [...] >> === >> def foo // [1] >> ... >> for (def foo in ) // would not use [1], would scope a new variable >> instead >> for (foo in ...) // would use [1] >> === >> If you are cosy with breaking

Re: Ugly inconsistence betw. for and for/in

On 05.09.25 17:17, Milles, Eric (TR Technology) via dev wrote: NOTE: Groovy 5 removes the expression *list* support from the first part of a classic form — variable declaration is the only option. So, "for (foo = 1, bar = 2;' ...; ...)" is no longer possible.  You must write "for (def foo = 1,

Re: Ugly inconsistence betw. for and for/in

On 05.09.25 18:10, OCsite wrote: [...] === def foo // [1] ... for (def foo in ) // would not use [1], would scope a new variable instead for (foo in ...) // would use [1] === If you are cosy with breaking backward compatibility, well, you should do /this/ change, not /that/ one which brea