On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Martin C. Martin <mar...@martincmartin.com> wrote:

I wouldn't even go there. Don't change any core libraries. Don't change anything except add an annotation (*not a keyword*) and a compiler hook (whatever way is least invasive). I personally am not looking for changes to the language per se. More like just how the bytecode is generated when the code is compiled.

There are TONS of places where any sort of "not-dynamic" semantics would mean certain core libs, and most of Grails wouldn't work inside such an annotated method i.e. map.someValue (right?) builders, slurpers, categories, obj."$method", etc. But this leaves a whole category of code that (as Martin said) is very straightforward and involves just direct method calls, arithmetic, etc. I would *love* to be able to choose "non-dynamic" Groovy syntax for my performant pieces of code rather than using Java classes. Question -- would GDK methods (like myList.each {.. } ) still work? Are they resolved into direct bytecode or do they go through the MOP?

-Tom

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email