Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byPablo Moretti
Groovy & Java
This document compares static and dynamic typing in Groovy and Java. Static typing catches errors earlier through compile-time type checking, while dynamic typing allows for more flexibility through duck typing and domain-specific languages. The document argues that for many modern applications, the benefits of dynamic typing in Groovy outweigh the advantages of static typing in Java, though static typing is still useful in some cases. It provides examples of design patterns that are reviewed when using a dynamic language and notes that performance is not necessarily better in Java.
More Related Content
Groovy & Java
- 1. Groovy vs Java NOV 2011
- 2. The real battleis static vs dynamic typing In other words: ● Static : The type of each variable (or expression) must be known at compile time. ● Dynamic: Type information is known only at runtime.
- 3. Which are theirsuper powers ? ● Static Typing –Errors are often detected earlier and with better error messages –Better IDE support –Better optimisations are often possible ● Dynamic Typing –Speeds up development through duck-typing –Allows more expressiveness through DSLs
- 4. We choose thedynamic way Many of the rules and patterns we have been taught no longer apply 1. Patterns to review ○ Singleton ○ Resources ○ Delegation ○ ... 2. Performace ○ Java always wins ? ○ We need win ?
- 5. DEMOS What are youdoing? Let's go to see CODE !!! https://github.com/pablomoretti/ppt-groovy-vs-java
- 6. Lessons ● Testing theDuck: Used when flexibility is important, but it has appropriate tests in place. ● Static Typing isn't the bad guy of the movie: Used when we know that code doesn´t need to be dynamic; typing is useful to shed some light on code. ● Interface-oriented design: The use of interfaces is not necessary, but they are useful. ● Performance: In Groovy, the sensitive parts can always be written in Java
- 7. Questions ? @elsantob