4 ms·

Well if you are going to jump out of Java then Scala should be a consideration as well. Even the Groovy creator commented that had Scala existed he would probab

• mgkimsal 16y ago
  Well Scala existed at that time (2003), but that's not what he'd said. If someone had showed him a 2008 book on Scala in 2003, he'd have not created Groovy. All that said, Strachan isn't really involved in Groovy and hasn't been for many years, so I'm not sure his views on the language or its appropriateness is of that much concern. A whole new team of people have been running with Groovy for years, and continue to make it better and more useful to people. Scala is different enough from Java that syntactically that it's a hard sell for many. Groovy is far more Java-ish for Java devs to pick up, and as such I think it will continue to have a growing userbase for the foreseeable future (but I'm biased, as I run groovymag.com!)
  • kls 16y ago
    Yeah, after re-reading my comment it comes off a lot more rude than was my intention. The point was to say that Scala is a really nice modernized "Java" (I know it is not but for simplicity, that is what I am going to call it) and that even the creator of Groovy thinks it has one of the most elegant designs out of the pack of Java replacements.
    • mgkimsal 16y ago
      NP - I didn't take it as rude. Just wrong ;)
      • kls 16y ago
        I don't see how recommending looking at Scala can be factually right or wrong, your bias may be influencing your bering there. The elegance of a language is subjective. The fact that Grooves founder finds it elegant lends credence to the fact that it is a popular opinion. Still no more right or wrong.
        • mgkimsal 16y ago
          The ;) is a wink - was meant to indicate to take it lightheartedly (aka a joke).