Besides the example page, I have an integration test ( making sure this functionality works.  If you'd like, I'm willing to help with your pom.


On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Mr Andersson <> wrote:

On 06/21/2016 02:38 PM, Winnebeck, Jason wrote:

Tying Cédric’s advice to your previous question about gmavenplus and joint compilation, per you add the configuration tag with a reference to your groovy script.

I also mentioned that I could not get Gmavenplus to work, but maybe i did something wrong. But I literally copied and pasted that section.


Actually about 90+% of our code base in Groovy is CompileStatic I wonder if we should use that. Cédric, if we use the config script method, is it still possible to use the “skip” annotation to switch back to dynamic mode? Even if it worked, I highly doubt IntelliJ IDEA would know about it and think all files are dynamic typing so probably it’s still best for us to add @CompileStatic everywhere, but sometimes we forget where we wanted it. The performance difference is extreme when we forget it, on a certain class we missed recently it took our page rendering times from about 4ms to 52ms, so for us it’s an actual “bug” to forget to add @CompileStatic.

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.

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.




From: Cédric Champeau []
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: Is it possible to enable CompileStatic for an entire project



2016-06-21 14:24 GMT+02:00 Mr Andersson <>:

Is it possible to enable CompileStatic for an entire project?

Or do you have to do it on a per class basis?

I like Groovy for some of it's features, and mostly for it's close to Java syntax but I would really like it to be a static language.

I've heard about Groovy++ but I believe that's dead by now, no?

Question is wether you can tell the Groovy compiler with a flag to treat all Groovy classes on certain paths as static?

Preferable doable from ANT too.


This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.