Re: Some draft GEPs: GEP-28 and GEP-29

Just a quick feedback for GEP-28: I saw that "Sigil variants" (@RED, 
:RED, etc) are already stated as rejected in the GEP, but what about 
something similar to Groovy's "it" in closures (maybe as an option, to 
also be able to break ambiguities without having to fall back to the 
current fully qualified notation) ?
To me the floating-in-free-air-dot-prefix notation ( .RED ) looks like 
an error / ugly...

Cheers,
mg

Am 28.07.2026 um 08:30 schrieb Paul King:
> Hi folks,
>
> I created two more draft GEPs tentatively targeting Groovy 7:
>
> * GEP-28 is about supporting DOT-notation that is supported by Dart and Swift.
> [I like the brevity it gives but it also takes some getting used to
> and it complicates things if Java ever develops a different compact
> syntax.]
>
> * GEP-29 is about supporting deeper null checking.
> [This is really about whether we want to fully support JSpecify which
> seems to be gaining momentum. NullChecker in Groovy 6 already offers
> partial support.]
>
> I don't really have the cycles to do major reviews of the GEPs yet,
> and I expect both will go through several iterations when we do. For
> both we should ask ourselves whether we need the feature and weigh up
> each's value against the increased complexity. But I wanted to capture
> the ideas anyway, since I think they are worth thinking about in due
> course. We should be comfortable with rejecting GEPs if the ideas
> don't belong or belong somewhere else.
>
> To be honest, we already have a backlog of potential Groovy 7 features
> that will keep us busy for a while.
>
> But if other folks want to jump ahead and think about them, feel free.
>
> Cheers, Paul.