On 04.04.2018 21:38, [email protected] wrote:
[...]I have submitted over 20 bugs in
the past months for existing features that do not mix well with
eachother or are not completely implemented and yet I feel the core
development thrust is not in fixing bugs for existing features but in
adding new features for the sake of new features.
not many are eager to spend their spare time after working hours on fixing
complicated bugs and going through the whole process and discussions.
If the incentive for fixing bugs was enticing enough, wouldn't there be eager developers?
Do you have a recipe of how to give an enticing incentive? Actually,
from looking at your issues you are suggesting solutions in some places,
but you seem not be motivated enough to make a pull request for example.
Why is that?
What then is the point of adding new features onto an unhealthy,
under-supported language?
I think you exaggerate. But the point is attracting new people. If you
do not move, people move away. Annoying, long standing bugs can have the
same effect of course
If this is truly the state of the union, then I would vote NO on all new
feature development.
We need to find the right balance. The new parser for example does not
exist because we wanted a new parser. It exists because the old parser
started to become a problem for fixing bugs. Of course once you have a
new parser, that is more maintainable and a person that understands it
very well, you will also see features from other languages and see them
with the eyes of a parser guy that is wondering if this brings any
benefit to Groovy. That is natural.
Anyway... the static compiler is a deep resource of bugs and will stay
being it a long time. Inner classes in all variants contain new
surprises time over time. But excluding those two topics what are your
top 3 of open bugs in jira entered by you where existing features do not
mix well with eachother or are not completely implemented?
bye Jochen
