4 ms·
Well, Groovy has never been "sexy" (in a CS sense) in the way Scala or Clojure are perceived to be. Despite that (or perhaps because of it) my experience has i
by rmaccloy 17y ago
Well, Groovy has never been "sexy" (in a CS sense) in the way Scala or Clojure are perceived to be.
Despite that (or perhaps because of it) my experience has indicated it's in wider use than either, and it has some enterprise-y backing (SpringSource) so I expect it's not going away.
Both Scala and Clojure are attracting people who weren't originally on the JVM though, which (again anecdotally) I don't think you can say of Groovy.
- mblakele 17y agoConfirming your second point, Indeed's job trends suggest that groovy has more jobs, and that it's growing faster: http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=groovy%2Cscala%2Cclojure&l= http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=groovy%2Cscala%2Cclojure&#... Caveat: some of these jobs might be talking about how groovy they are. On the first two pages of http://www.indeed.com/q-groovy-jobs.html http://www.indeed.com/q-groovy-jobs.html there were 19 groovy-lang jobs and one false positive.
- icey 17y agoThe idea that Groovy attracts more people who are currently working in Java seems to mesh with my experience. Coming from very little experience with Java, I have a hard time choosing Groovy over something like Scala (or Clojure). I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with Groovy. I don't personally care for it; but as far as I'm concerned the more languages the better when it comes to the JVM.