Why is it hard to add to the build? Is it a bootstrapping issue? On 23 February 2016 at 09:26, Cédric Champeau <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jochen, > > I need more context too. What changes are you talking about? It seems very > abstract so far. I would be in favor of a joint compiler without stubs in > Groovy core itself. I think both Gradle and Jetbrains would be interested > in such a compiler too. And not talking about an incremental compiler. > What, technically, are the necessary changes? > > 2016-02-23 9:18 GMT+01:00 Thibault Kruse <[email protected]>: > >> I needed some background information, I guess that is given in : >> >> http://blackdragsview.blogspot.de/2014/11/a-joint-compiler-for-groovy-and-java.html >> http://blackdragsview.blogspot.de/2007/07/joint-compilation-in-groovy.html >> >> http://wiki.jvmlangsummit.com/images/8/8a/Clement_MixedLanguageProjectCompilationInEclipse.pdf >> >> I believe if the joint compiler has good chances of replacing the >> current compiler it should live in Groovy core. If it is doomed to >> forever remain an unloved twin, it should be a project of it's own. >> >> In the mean time it can either be a separate project with similar >> package names (for easy migrationinto groovy later) , or an >> experimental branch of groovy. >> >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:37 AM, Jochen Theodorou <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > During transit I am these days working on a new joint compiler for >> Groovy, >> > one that handles Groovy transforms correctly and does not require stubs >> (we >> > can still create them). >> > >> > The current current version works for several cases and is still >> incomplete, >> > but there are some decisions to make in which I would like to ask the >> people >> > here about their opinion. >> > >> > The main point is actually about keeping the code in Groovy or not and >> if to >> > add the code to the Groovy codebase or not. >> > >> > A Groovy based joint compiler will not be easy to integrate in our >> build, if >> > it is supposed to run with current Groovy. The joint compiler on the >> other >> > hand does not require any changes to the current compiler, even though >> it >> > could benefit from them. So in theory it would be possible to use any >> Groovy >> > 2.x with this joint compiler. I think that could be interesting as well. >> > Though I have done nothing about build tools so far. At the very least >> the >> > best way of integrating them will require some thought - but I am not >> sure >> > that just replacing what we currently have in Groovy is the best way >> here. >> > And I do like the idea of using Groovy to build Groovy ;) >> > >> > Changing the codebase to Java will surely at least double the lines of >> code >> > and some logic changes since I do require double dispatch in many >> places. >> > But I am still in a proof of concept phase, so there will naturally be >> many >> > lines of code more in the future as well. >> > >> > And of course, if the integration of such a compiler is not wished for, >> it >> > would naturally become its own project. >> > >> > So what do other people think about that? >> > >> > bye Jochen >> > >
