Groovy doesn't get enough love as a post-JVM language because they missed the static typing boat. People that like static languages use Java, Scala, etc. Peop

Groovy doesn't get enough love as a post-JVM language because they missed the static typing boat. People that like static languages use Java, Scala, etc. People that like dynamic languages use Python, Ruby (JRuby), etc. Who's left over to use Groovy? The people that like Grails and Gradle. Which is fine, but the popularity of the whole language is resting on these two frameworks, IMO, which seems precarious. It's original thesis, a scripting language for the JVM, was interesting when it first started, but since then the JVM implementations of traditional scripting languages has gotten really good. Personally, I believe that if they'd pivoted to static typing around Groovy 1.0, they would have been the Java next by now. They would have won. They were years ahead of Scala. And it's always sounded like a great, working man's language/compiler, e.g. powerful AST/meta-programming/etc. There were people in the Groovy camp who wanted to do this (the @Typed annotations that they have now), but it took too long, AFAICT, because the core committers had spent so much time convincing everyone that a dynamic language on the JVM was worthwhile that they didn't realize a static one would have taken their adoption to the next level.