Martin C. Martin schrieb: [...]

are you sure? This should be:

assert foo(a) == 1 assert foo((Object)b) == 2 assert foo(c) == 1 assert foo((Object)d) == 2

and this should be mentioned too:

assert foo(b) == 1 assert foo(d) == 1

Groovy uses the Java idiom of casting a parameter to enable the selection of a certain method.. I am not sure that this should be seen as static or mixed typing.

well we added this before 1.0, because in some cases it is the only way to select the right method.

looks like I can't follow you... yes, what you said about "a=23" is true, but what is the point? Groovy compiles "a=23" as "a=(T)23", where T is the type of a, as long as the type is known.... which means for example, that for properties no cast happens.

do less at runtime and do more at compile time of what exactly? A method selecton? Yes, I am positivce we can let the compiler guess the method... or in other words let the compiler guess the initial method used ofr the call site cache. But in general return types andtypes of properties are unknown, so the compiler can't really do much more than guessing in many cases.

let us make this more easy by making it more special. Let us say there is a way to say that always the default MetaClass will be used for all objects. In that case we could for final classes and if all types of all parameters are known generate a static call without loosing semantic. final because of our multi methods. With this it can be can be considered as rare case.

bye blackdrag

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

http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email