jastrachan | 3 Jul 03:23 2004
Picon

Re: could groovyc generate classes that are not dependent on the groovy runtime?

Who knows, maybe groovy will get included in the JDK / JRE one day and 
this would be a mute point :)

But yes until such a time, since Groovy adds new types (closures, 
ranges), new features (dynamic method invocation etc) as well as new 
helper methods (Groovy JDK) then we need to ship a jar with groovy code 
thats compiled to binary. If folks were really worried about it we 
could maybe trim things down a little (e.g. if you never wanted to 
dynamically compile groovy expressions and wanted to do it all at build 
time, then there's no reason to ship the compiler).

But these days, whats a few hundred K for a jar? Have you seen how big 
the XML parser is we all use? :)

On 29 Jun 2004, at 22:10, Michael Campbell wrote:
> I'm not sure I agree with your hypothesis; *java* requires runtime
> classes; that groovy requires a few others I don't think puts it on
> any different "status".
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andrew Ferguson <andrew.ferguson@...>
> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 15:39:03 +0100
> Subject: [groovy-user] could groovyc generate classes that are not
> dependent on the groovy runtime?
> To: groovy-user@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> hi,
>
>
>
>  would it be
> possible to have groovyc generate classes that don't need the groovy 
> runtime
> classes? this would mean that groovy would have equal status as java
> in terms of
> choosing a language for parts of the project i'm working on.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Andrew
>
>

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/


Gmane