You might be familiar with last year's Groovy Conundrum in Dr Dobb's magazine... "For all its strengths, however, Groovy suffered from several important drawba

You might be familiar with last year's Groovy Conundrum in Dr Dobb's magazine... "For all its strengths, however, Groovy suffered from several important drawbacks: the first and most painful was performance. It was slow — even for a dynamic language. The second limitation was that Groovy had no real design philosophy, save for a wide-ranging pragmatism. Any new feature that brightened enough eyes in the community got thrown in. So the language grew organically in ways that were hard to predict, rather than having a clear philosophy and a long-term trajectory. Finally, there was the problem that I believe most cramped its acceptance: limited documentation. There was one "Bible" and a pair of tutorials that rehashed the basics." http://www.drdobbs.com/jvm/the-groovy-conundrum/240147731 http://www.drdobbs.com/jvm/the-groovy-conundrum/240147731