Are there compelling reasons not to use Groovy?
- by Leonard H Martin
I'm developing a LoB application in Java after a long absence from the platform (having spent the last 8 years or so entrenched in Fortran, C, a smidgin of C++ and latterly .Net).
Java, the language, is not much changed from how I remember it. I like it's strengths and I can work around its weaknesses - the platform has grown and deciding upon the myriad of different frameworks which appear to do much the same thing as one another is a different story; but that can wait for another day - all-in-all I'm comfortable with Java. However, over the last couple of weeks I've become enamoured with Groovy, and purely from a selfish point of view: but not just because it makes development against the JVM a more succinct and entertaining (and, well, "groovy") proposition than Java (the language).
What strikes me most about Groovy is its inherent maintainability. We all (I hope!) strive to write well documented, easy to understand code. However, sometimes the languages we use themselves defeat us. An example: in 2001 I wrote a library in C to translate EDIFACT EDI messages into ANSI X12 messages. This is not a particularly complicated process, if slightly involved, and I thought at the time I had documented the code properly - and I probably had - but some six years later when I revisited the project (and after becoming acclimatised to C#) I found myself lost in so much C boilerplate (mallocs, pointers, etc. etc.) that it took three days of thoughtful analysis before I finally understood what I'd been doing six years previously.
This evening I've written about 2000 lines of Java (it is the day of rest, after all!). I've documented as best as I know how, but, but, of those 2000 lines of Java a significant proportion is Java boiler plate.
This is where I see Groovy and other dynamic languages winning through - maintainability and later comprehension. Groovy lets you concentrate on your intent without getting bogged down on the platform specific implementation; it's almost, but not quite, self documenting. I see this as being a huge boon to me when I revisit my current project (which I'll port to Groovy asap) in several years time and to my successors who will inherit it and carry on the good work.
So, are there any reasons not to use Groovy?
