[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-8574?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16467556#comment-16467556 ]
Eric Milles edited comment on GROOVY-8574 at 5/8/18 3:29 PM: ------------------------------------------------------------- Also, should these predicate methods have {{Closure<Boolean>}} instead of plain {{Closure}}? Or does the current impl support Groovy truth of the returned value? was (Author: emilles): Also, should these predicate methods have {{Closure<Boolean>}} instead of plain {{Closure}}? > Add type parameterization and @ClosureParams to each/every/etc. Object > variants > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: GROOVY-8574 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-8574 > Project: Groovy > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 2.6.0-alpha-3, 3.0.0-alpha-2, 2.4.15, 2.5.0-rc-2 > Reporter: Eric Milles > Priority: Minor > > Similar to GROOVY-8573, there are a few DGMs that operate on "anything that > can be converted to an iterator", ex: {{every(Object,Closure)}}. Would it be > safe to convert these to type-parameterized methods to allow proper > {{@ClosureParams}} tagging? > Ex: > {code:java} > public static boolean every(Object self, Closure closure) > // becomes: > public static <T> boolean every(T self, > @ClosureParams(value=FromString.class, options={"T"}) Closure closure) > {code} > I think this is binary-compatible with the old signature since the T is > erased at compile time. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)