If we are to add a new method in 2.5 or 3.0 (we should definitely not
change the behavior of with{} IMHO), I really like "tap" as a name.On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Juan Vazquez <[email protected]> wrote: > Tim Yates created an extension module for tap. > > > https://github.com/timyates/groovy-common-extensions/blob/master/src/main/groovy/com/bloidonia/groovy/extensions/ObjectExtensionMethods.groovy > > Thanks, > Juan > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Jochen Theodorou <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 06.07.2016 16:24, Suderman Keith wrote: >> >>> -1 to a breaking change (in 2.5 or 3.0). I agree with Jason, breaking >>> changes only for methods that are widely considered to be broken. >>> >> >> if no breaking changes even in a new major version, then when? >> >> >>> -1 to a new method. While a new method may be better than a breaking >>> change I don’t like to see Object’s namespace become even more polluted >>> with marginally useful methods. I don’t think the current behaviour is so >>> offensive that it requires an additional method on Object; is `x.with { it >>> }` really that bad? >>> >> >> yes, I feel the namespace for Object is too polluted already as well. >> >> bye Jochen >> > > > > -- > -Juan > -- Guillaume Laforge Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
