9 Jul 2004 11:39
Re: Groovy incompatibility with Java
On 9 Jul 2004, at 10:32, Laforge Guillaume wrote: >> the one thing that would most likely get me using groovy in >> production code >> (sooner rather than later) is if groovyc produced (or had the option >> to produce) >> .class files (or maybe even java source code?) that didn't require >> any redistributables >> to execute. I don't know how realisitic this is, and if the only way >> of doing it was >> equivalent to "generating" the pre-written runtime in the groovyc >> output directory >> then that's probably not worth looking into > > groovyc (the Groovy compiler) doest definitely produce .class files > directly. Just to be clear - I misread the above sentence first time through. Groovyc does create .class files. Groovy always turns scripts into bytecode - the main difference with groovyc is that the .class files are written to disk, like javac > It compiles Groovy source code into fully compliant and valid bytecode > for the JVM. Agreed. > We don't produce Java source code either. But I guess it would be > feasable by mapping our AST (Abstract Syntax Tree) to the one of Java > (as built by the javac compiler). Currently, we don't have plans to > support that, though we've had some discussions to use Java's syntax > tree instead of our own. Agreed - there's no reason why we couldn't turn create a pre processor - i.e. turn groovy code into java source code - though I'm not sure how useful that'd be. James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
RSS Feed