On 21.06.2016 09:04, Mr Andersson wrote:
Gmaven or Gmaven 2 did not work for me either. Resulted in a bunch of
compilation issues which I started to correct, but then gave up on. I
shouldn't have to change my code to get on Groovy.
yeah, forget about those... gmavenplus is supposed to work. If that one
does not do the job, then there is a problem
[...]
Plus have you seen the size of this examples page?
https://github.com/groovy/GMavenPlus/wiki/Examples
Fifty ways to configure. I don't even know anything about what I need
when i start off, so that's just too much headache.
you wanted joint compilation, so go to
https://github.com/groovy/GMavenPlus/wiki/Examples#joint-compilation and
hopefully be done.
The ant task for me is good enough.
well, then everything is almost fine ;)
[...]
command line is even more simple ;)
Not easy to integrate a command line argument for maven it seems. I am
not sure how you can add that to the classpath. I was trying really hard
on that but could not find any info, like with everything involving
searching for Java issues. Google sucks at this, or the Java folks
seriously do not ask or think enough about doing things the right way.
https://www.google.pl/search?q=adding+to+maven+classpath&oq=adding+to+maven+classpath&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.10311j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8
I think the maven structure is not really made for executing command
line commands... you could always use the ant runner to do that kind of
thing of course, but then why use maven at all.
In constract, pulling in Scala and Kotlin ( during the process which I
gave up on Groovy ) took seconds.
well, there are some maven people, here only very few
Groovy has been alive for over 10 years. It has to be a couple of people
wanting to integrate Groovy in a JEE environment by now.
maven works best if you follow the maven conventions and the very few
maven projects I had to do with really tried to follow that.
And I doubting the procedure is different for gradle.
give it a try. But it has its quirks too as well of course. For example
if you have files in src/main/java and in src/main/groovy, the groovy
plugin will not do joint compilation for the files in src/main/java. You
can easily change that by
sourceSets.main.java.srcDirs = []
sourceSets.main.groovy.srcDirs += ["src/main/java"]
or use a totally different folder.... or multiple folders. ant is more
direct in that you will always have to supply that information anyway.
if that is more easy or not, I don´t know. But I have seen some pretty
complex builds and most of them I really would not like to do with ant I
must say.
Relying on the Eclipse compiler is not a good thing as it has a history
of breaking and not being up to date with any other compiler that one
might wish to use.
Which is why the page suggests gmavenplus for maven... maybe that
should be more clear
Did not work with both. The ant task should be the one mentioned because
it will always succeed, unless you can figure how to add it to the
classpath.
Most important is that you got something working. Granted, it took too
long and longer than it should have, and that is the fault of our
documentation. Which brings me to the point of asking you what you would
suggest how we should change our documentation so the next one will not
have to do so much fighting.
[...]
I am not sure what it means that you always compile all files. I haven't
tried it enough but besides a 15 seconds extra build time, i don't see
much difference in repetition.
It means, that if you change one class, you will compile all of them and
live with the build overhead. If you have several hundred files to
compile, this will add up during development and testing.
compared with eclipse groovy plugin:
* stubs cannot compile as many scenarios as the integrated approach of
the eclipse groovy compiler
* not really integrated in maven, thus you always compile all files
I am working on a new compiler tool for Groovy, which is supposed to
have less of those disadvantages, for which I will then also look for
more proper maven integration (I am hoping here on the help of gmaven
plus). But that is still in the future and no fast project, because my
free time is limited
It should be simple, one plugin declaration with all configuration right
there, and work.
agreed.. though will only if you follow the conventions for maven,
because any different way will require additional configuration.. but I
guess that is clear already
bye Jochen
