Probably this is the wrong mailing list to start a Groovy vs Ruby language debate, but since the can of worms is open, I feel obligated to point out that it is at best a highly subjective statement to claim that Groovy has "all the advantages of Ruby", and at worst, misleading. It's obvious that Groovy borrows much from Ruby, sure. And if you want a Java compatible Java syntax havin' but more dynamic language, I'm sure Groovy is fine. But if you want a great dynamic programming language, you can settle for something that "maybe isn't too much of a compromise" or you can have the real deal in JRuby ;)
--Chris On 8/17/07, Kenneth McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Raphaël Valyi wrote: > > > > - What can't you do with Java integration and JRuby today? > > > > > > No big limit as far as I know. I think if you extend a Java class in > > Ruby, then that class won't look extended from Java. Only Ruby will > > see those extensions. Of course changing an object from JRuby also > > changes it in Java, I was really talking about the classes here. > > I'm not really sure this limit remain true with the new compiler > > advances. > > Core team devs will reply you better here. > Yes, someone on the know please clarify if Java will be able to see > JRuby subclasses of Java classes. This would be a Good Thing (and I'm > guessing it will happen) > > A related question on the efficiency front. Let's say that, purely for > my Ruby code, I define a new subclass of JButton, 'class MyButton < > javax.swing.JButton; . . .; end'. Now, I can use those new features > happily in JRuby, and Java will still happily treat it as a button, > _but_, how much of a performance hit does pure Java code take when > accessing and manipulating that object, since it isn't manipulating a > 'normal' Java object. (I'm not looking for exact numbers here, 'big' > indicating that method calls/field accesses take a lot longer, or > 'small' indicating that don't take too much longer, would be fine :-) ) > This is something I'd like to know in general, and also it can > potentially be quite important in complex dynamic Swing layouts, where > speed is of the essence... > > And, if the answer is 'big', an ideas on how much compilation might do > to improve this? > > > > - Why would you use Groovy over JRuby? > > > > > > Charity action. Well, no seriously, if your devs really fear new > > language constructs (but IMHO Ruby basics are easy to pick up) or if > > you really want to use mainly J2EE frameworks and you aren't really > > interested in Rails nor in other ruby frameworks. > > > > - Why would you use JRuby over Groovy? > > > > > > If you need to do efficient web dev and think Rails is great for that, > > if you like Ruby as a language to use, if you don't want to take too > > much risk with a language who has a very small community (Groovy vs > > Ruby communities). If you want to get rich and save the world from the > > bloatware attacks :) > I think the above is, while fairly accurate, a little harsh. Groovy was > designed with Java in mind, and its semantics offer effectively all of > the advantages of Ruby, while integrating with Java much more cleanly. > In addition, Groovy offers optional typing, IMHO a major feature that > all scripting languages should have. (Basically, you can declare a type > on a variable, parameter, etc.; if you do so, those declarations are > checked at runtime.) This is a convenient way of enhancing code > robustness, potentially allows for such things as operator overloading > and more efficient code compilation, and also has significant advantages > in terms of increasing code readability. Groovy has also looked at what > Ruby arguably 'got wrong' and avoided most of those problems (while > introducing a few of its own). So Groovy has strengths. > > More simply, Groovy does have strengths, some significant, that JRuby > lacks. > > However, last I heard, Groovy was really quite absurdly slow in places, > and though it's hard to be sure, I suspect Raphaël's contention that > Groovy's active user/dev community is quite small is correct. JRuby's > development has been phenomenal, and (to me at least), it seems clear > that the JRuby team is very, very sharp. Then there are other cool > things, like the availability of Ruby libs and tools that work in JRuby. > > I just wanted to point out that Groovy does have features that JRuby > doesn't, and that some of those features are quite attractive. > > Ciao, > Ken > > > > Cheers, > > > > Raphaël Valyi. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for all your help guys. > > > > John > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from this list please visit: > > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > <http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email> > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > >
