[bartonfink]

This reminds me quite a bit of Groovy, just with a different compiler back end (outputting Java source instead of bytecode). However, this makes me wonder what the point is. Groovy is more-or-less source compatible with Java already (a valid Java program is also a valid Groovy program), so I'm not sure what Extend brings to the table.

[vorg]

> a valid Java program is also a valid Groovy program), so I'm not sure what Extend brings to the table.

Groovy is dynamically typed, not statically typed. Though a month ago Springsource/EMC hired someone to build a static type checker (called Grumpy) for Groovy (http://www.jroller.com/melix/entry/groovy_static_type_checke...) with the usual solicit for free labor by spinning the "open source" tale.

Presumably they heard about Xtend from the same place Jboss/Redhat and Jetbrains did. Hence the recent avalanche of announcements regarding Ceylon, Kotlin, and Grumpy.

[liquidcool]

I agree, I don't see a reason to switch from Groovy. I don't see the Scala or Clojure people switching, either. But even if you're just trying to convince Java developers, Groovy's ecosystem (including Grails) is hard to beat.

And actually, I'm using Groovy++ (http://code.google.com/p/groovypptest/), which addresses the concerns about static typing, inference, and performance, all for the cost of an extra jar. It's really surprising how few people - even Groovy programmers - have heard of this. I think it really ought to be included in the core language.

[vorg]

>I don't see a reason to switch from Groovy

> Groovy's ecosystem (including Grails) is hard to beat

Are you part of Groovy's echo system too?

[lemming]

It's statically typed so will presumably be as fast as Java while being nicer to use.

[chokma]

A valid Java program is not always a valid Groovy program - see http://groovy.codehaus.org/Differences+from+Java

== in Java is identity, in Groovy it is .equals() Inner classes are not supported.