On 07.05.2018 17:54, Cédric Champeau wrote:
I'd typically very much prefer a custom file extension for example.
That would be my preferred way to give anyone a simple mean to choose static compilation as the default for a Groovy file. Afair the counter argument was, that Groovy compiles any file with any extension in dynamic mode by default, so this might be a breaking change if someone has used the picked extension for his files. Groovy 3.0 might be the right spot to introduce something like this, since there will be breaking changes anyway...
That said, since I'm not contributing code anymore (my last contribution was rewriting most of the build, which I hope was helpful),
Any improvement/speedup of the Gradle build was _definitely_ appreciated :-)
I'm happy to step down and let you work as you wish.
This is tricky: One cannot agree with just any direction someone who invests the time to advance Groovy wants to take it too, that would be taking Doocracy too far, imho, and might lead to a Groovy which is much worse than it could be. In this particular case I am torn: I think we could definitely live with the system property, I don't feel there is a large probability that it will break anything. On the other hand, using the existing mechanism, or introducing a static compilation source file extension, or a compiler switch seem to me to be the better choices - but maybe Daniel can explain why he went with the property approach ?-)
Cheers, mg
