<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Groovy Letdown</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/</link>
	<description>Thoughts, rants, and even some code from the mind of Barney Boisvert.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2014 09:58:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: barneyb</title>
		<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/comment-page-1/#comment-169442</link>
		<dc:creator>barneyb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:54:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=704#comment-169442</guid>
		<description>Jim,

That makes sense.  I&#039;d expected it to work more like Java, where the wrapping happens on-demand (though still at compile time), rather than universally.  But no great loss either way.  I&#039;ll trade a bit of performance for the ease of use.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim,</p>
<p>That makes sense.  I'd expected it to work more like Java, where the wrapping happens on-demand (though still at compile time), rather than universally.  But no great loss either way.  I'll trade a bit of performance for the ease of use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Bernatowicz</title>
		<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/comment-page-1/#comment-169423</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Bernatowicz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=704#comment-169423</guid>
		<description>You are correct, speculating that there are no primitives such as int.

Just last night I was reading that everything is an object in Groovy.  If you declare something as a primitive, Groovy will silently wrap it in a class such as Long, Integer, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are correct, speculating that there are no primitives such as int.</p>
<p>Just last night I was reading that everything is an object in Groovy.  If you declare something as a primitive, Groovy will silently wrap it in a class such as Long, Integer, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: barneyb</title>
		<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/comment-page-1/#comment-165194</link>
		<dc:creator>barneyb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:05:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=704#comment-165194</guid>
		<description>DT,

Over lunch I stuck Groovy 1.6 in there.  It knocked about 20% off the execution time versus 1.5.7 for the specific test I was doing.  Brought the fully optimized version down to 1:20, so still not fast enough to break the minute barrier.  On the same machine, the unoptimized Java takes right about 110ms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DT,</p>
<p>Over lunch I stuck Groovy 1.6 in there.  It knocked about 20% off the execution time versus 1.5.7 for the specific test I was doing.  Brought the fully optimized version down to 1:20, so still not fast enough to break the minute barrier.  On the same machine, the unoptimized Java takes right about 110ms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: barneyb</title>
		<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/comment-page-1/#comment-165182</link>
		<dc:creator>barneyb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:48:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=704#comment-165182</guid>
		<description>DT,

No, still running 1.5.  I created the project back in early February and haven&#039;t upgraded since the release.  I know it&#039;s supposed to be significantly faster, but haven&#039;t given it a whirl yet.  The Eclipse plugin is still serving 1.5.7, and I haven&#039;t dug into figure out how to set it up with a different JAR.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DT,</p>
<p>No, still running 1.5.  I created the project back in early February and haven't upgraded since the release.  I know it's supposed to be significantly faster, but haven't given it a whirl yet.  The Eclipse plugin is still serving 1.5.7, and I haven't dug into figure out how to set it up with a different JAR.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DT</title>
		<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/comment-page-1/#comment-165177</link>
		<dc:creator>DT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=704#comment-165177</guid>
		<description>Are you using version 1.6?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you using version 1.6?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: denny</title>
		<link>https://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2009/03/02/a-groovy-letdown/comment-page-1/#comment-165098</link>
		<dc:creator>denny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=704#comment-165098</guid>
		<description>Further reading: http://java.dzone.com/news/groovy-vs-java-performance-jav

Cool that cfscript is faster, who woulda thunk it?  =]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Further reading: <a href="http://java.dzone.com/news/groovy-vs-java-performance-jav" rel="nofollow">http://java.dzone.com/news/groovy-vs-java-performance-jav</a></p>
<p>Cool that cfscript is faster, who woulda thunk it?  =]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
