From: Jamis Buck <jgb3@...>
Date: 2004-03-18T00:46:57+09:00
Subject: Re: groovy

Paul Vudmaska wrote:

> markusjais@yahoo.de wrote: >>only future will tell if this will be a 
> huge success or not<< my guess is that it will be a big success as 
> scripting languages supplant compiled ones as biz decision makers begin 
> to see that you can get real work done with them in less time. this is a 
> good thing for ruby, me thinks, as there are so many java shops who 
> could benefit from groovy immidiately and get them thinking of script 
> languages for real work. if i were a java guy(or mgr) i'd be all over it.

It is certainly easier to use than Java (I write Java code for a living, 
and I've played with Groovy), but the already-resource-hungry Java 
environment becomes even more so when using Groovy.  Groovy does not use 
any of Java's primitive types--everything is an object, which means 
ints, etc. all get boxed into Integer objects.  This means iteration 
over a range is MUCH slower in Groovy than in Java.  I was, frankly, 
very disappointed when I discovered that, since I would otherwise have 
started using Groovy in a heartbeat, and told my supervisors about it 
after I'd already snuck Groovy apps into production. :)

It is a step in the right direction, though.

-- 
Jamis Buck
jgb3@email.byu.edu
http://www.jamisbuck.org/jamis

ruby -h | ruby -e 
'a=[];readlines.join.scan(/-(.)\[e|Kk(\S*)|le.l(..)e|#!(\S*)/) {|r| a << 
r.compact.first };puts "\n>#{a.join(%q/ /)}<\n\n"'