groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Schalk Cronjé <>
Subject Re: Is it possible to enable CompileStatic for an entire project
Date Sun, 26 Jun 2016 16:43:46 GMT
I think many of the issues can be solved by the mythical beast called 
Groovy 3. It will however, require backwards compatiblity to be broken. 
Quite a number of people will probably be opposed to this and they will 
have good reason to be as well. This leaves the future of the language 
in limbo.

On 26/06/2016 09:38, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 14:30 +0200, Mr Andersson wrote:
> […]
>> I do think that's the biggest problem. Groovy was the second largest
>> JVM
>> language in 2010, but it is not really that big anymore, mostly of
>> competition by static languages such as Scala and Kotlin.
> Groovy has no serious traction in the static world. Even with the
> marketing push given by many people, including myself, Groovy has the
> label "dynamic" firmly stuck to it; it is seen in the same grouping as
> Clojure (and JRuby and Jython). When people are no discussing
> refactoring of codebases then if the base language is Java then the
> choice of language is Kotlin.
>> People want to be able to refactor without risking of the code
>> eventually breaking totally, and that's the problem with Groovy.
>> Code
>> will eventually become stale and stop working if it is put on layway
>> for
>> a while. No compile time checks is a problem for anyone interested
>> in
>> code quality.
> This sounds like lazy staff misusing a dynamic language. People using
> Groovy (and Clojure) as dynamic languages tend not to have this
> problem.

Schalk W. Cronjé
Twitter / Ello / Toeter : @ysb33r

View raw message