On 26 October 2012 19:54, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Johnny Zhang <xiao...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > Roman, how is your experience with Groovy's back compatibility? If we > bump > > to 1.8 or 2.0, do we expect any current tests failures? >
1.8.x is pretty good, no problems I've encountered except that some of the maven plugins are hard-coded to older ones (that's maven for you) I haven't used 2.x. What it does promise is invokedynamic on Java7 and performance gains from that http://dist.groovy.codehaus.org/JVM%20Summit%202012%20-%20Groovy.pdf -plus a static compile option. for using Groovy in apps (as opposed to test code or other stuff where you want high-perf groovy, this is all good). For tests? I don't see Groovy the bottleneck in my own code, though apart from some GUI stuff. Groovy actually makes writing Swing apps something that you'd actually consider doing: https://github.com/hortonworks/HA-Monitor/blob/master/hmonitor/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ambari/servicemonitor/clients/gui/Ham.groovy You still need a reason to do so (here the monitoring/demo tool for HDFS and JT failure), but once you've made that decision, Groovy is the language to start with -at least until Java adds closures.
