On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:06AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> >> Close, but not quite. I had Groovy in mind, actually. That also gives you
> >> the
> >> advantage of doing your own DSLs if you need to e.g. code as config and all
> >> that jazz.
> >>
> >>
> > I am a happy groovy user, but it's got its own classpath and setup issues.
> > The nice thing about .py, .ruby &c is that they run outside the JVM
> 
> For small things where you don't use a single external library that happens
> to be outside of the default installation that is absolutely true. However,
> I found it extremely difficult to write portable code that would also rely
> on some less widespread libraries in Python and Ruby. Basically to this
> day, I have clue how to do an equivalent of a 'fat jar' in those things.
> 
> With Groovy (or any JVM-based language for that matter) this is extremely
> easy. Essentially all I have to tell my customers is this:
>    $ java -jar fat.jar
> and I'm done.

Very agreeably second this, except that I would very cautious with the clause 
"or
any JVM-based language" while this is really true in groovy case.

Cos

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to