groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Theodorou <>
Subject Re: Is it possible to enable CompileStatic for an entire project
Date Tue, 21 Jun 2016 20:55:01 GMT
> The problem with  the ANT task is that I don't think I can set classpath
> argumetns to the actual so passing the config location is a problem that
> needs be resolved. Not that easy with maven.

I am actually not quite sure what you mean with "I don't think I can set 
classpath arguments to the actual". 
shows some usages in pure ant, that also define a classpath, plus the 
config script is just another argument on the task... in your maven 
versions you had <classpath refid="maven.compile.classpath"/>, so I 
guess the classpath problem is a solved one? As I said, I donĀ“t fully 
understand what you mean..

> *Groovy should instead provide a default GroovyStatic-2.4.4.jar* file
> that enables this by default. That way everybody wins, and Groovy could
> join the club of static languages and not get rejected by those that
> needs to get Groovy.
> It is also messy to set up config files for every maven module, although
> I am not sure. The code in that config file is also not dynamic.
> withConfig(configuration){ast(groovy.transform.CompileStatic)} and a
> simple option -compileStatic that uses an internal version of that file
> is preferable and *SIMPLER***.
> groovyc -configscript src/conf/config.groovy src/main/groovy/MyClass.groovy
> Is not needed here.

I think a command line option is something we can do. Those config 
scripts are actually more powerful, in that you can freely configure the 
compiler in them - better than any option would be able to do. Typical 
use case is to define several transforms that are always applied. 
CompileStatic is only one among them... ut it has a very distinct use 
case, which is why we really should consider adding that as a standard 

bye Jochen

View raw message