Valid groovy, does not mean it will run the same also. It may compile, but all the classes and method calls are actually different under the hood. So, it's more read/write, but not run as is!
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 11:57 PM, greggobridges <[email protected]>wrote: > > I think they are caught in between a rock and a hard place. Their main > impetus for being Java compatible is so that a Groovy newbie can copy > over a Java class and then make it more Groovy. I don't think Graeme > et al. really intend for people to continue coding Java in Groovy, but > to incrementally embrace the Groovy way of doing things; on the other > hand, they want Java developers to switch over and try it out. Either > route, they're going to get complaints from somebody. I remember that > the Java 'for' loop got pulled early on, but then they ended up > putting it back later because people complained that it made it hard > for migration. > > That said, I'm not sure that 'valid java is valid groovy' is a > 'central tenet'. I think the tenet is for Groovy to 'seamlessly > integrate with all existing Java objects and libraries', which is > different. > > -Greg > > > On Jan 14, 9:46 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > > A long time ago, when I read about groovy, I remember reading about a > > central tenet of the groovy language being: Existing java language > > should also be valid groovy. > > > > This struck me as pretty dumb at the time, and still does: There are > > plenty of weird things in java which I *really* don't want to see > > repeated in another language, such as '==' being used for object > > identity (an operation absolutely nobody ever uses - something that > > CLEARLY should have been offloaded to System.objectsAreIdentical(a, b) > > or some such). > > > > I also know it's not actually true (the equals(SomehingThatIsntObject) > > java puzzler would actually work as you expect in groovy, because > > groovy effectively uses reflection to handle every call, at least in > > spirit, whereas java only checks the type and 'hardcodes' the target > > method, but that means that java code run as groovy code isn't exactly > > equal). > > > > Is this still the case? > > > -- http://www.jfrog.org/ http://freddy33.blogspot.com/ http://nothingisinfinite.blogspot.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
