3 ms·
Have they considered what the languages are being used for? Scala with its intensive static typing is more likely to be used for serious systems, while Groovy f
by vorg 15y ago
Have they considered what the languages are being used for? Scala with its intensive static typing is more likely to be used for serious systems, while Groovy for quick scripts to test stuff. And then there's JRuby not mentioned, because its lumped under Ruby: who knows what proportion of that is JRuby and what is Matz's Ruby?
- jbarmash 15y ago> while Groovy for quick scripts to test stuff. I doubt groovy would be listed in job ads just for scripting. Grails has pretty significant adoption, both among startups, and to a larger extend among the enterprises, e.g. Java Shops. This is a great summary of the sate of the Groovy / Grails ecosystem: http://burtbeckwith.com/blog/?p=1126 http://burtbeckwith.com/blog/?p=1126 I am curious with Grails 2.0 out for a few months now, and Groovy itself nearing 2.0, whether the adoption will reach an inflection point (and I do anecdotally see more activity of late). Knowing both (though much heavier experience with Grails), I don't see significant differences in productivity between the two. For the Java shops, Grails vs Rails, is not really a contest - Grails should win on pure technical merits, although of course it not always does for other reasons.
- thebluesky 15y agoThe poll results indicate that on the JVM JRuby trails Scala, Groovy and Clojure significantly. The indeed.com discussion probably excludes JRuby for the reasons you mention.
- kschrader 15y agoI find it unfortunate that we now equate "intensive static typing" with "serious systems." I know of almost as many serious systems written in Clojure as I do in Scala, and I think it's fair to say that they're pretty much polar opposites as far as typing goes.