Golo 0-preview6
Preparing for the next preview
Nashorn fibonacci
Closure test with Nashorn
Dispatch Nashorn tests

Benchmarking dispatches is tricky: toString() on integers is a JS-special thing,
new Object() is not new java.lang.Object(), etc.
Dynamic objects Nashorn tests

If there was 1 test JS had to shine... :-)
Nashorn filter/map/reduce
Removed superfluous call
Further precisions
Clean .jsonp files
Thorough Groovy indy tests

It turns out that Groovy does not simply use invokedynamic when using the -indy jar. It requires
explicit invokedynamic configuration, too. This means that most Groovy applications in the wild do
not use invokedynamic, unless they have been compiled with explicit indy support.

I added more tests with and without Groovy invokedynamic. The comparison is "funny".
Ability to skip awfully slow tests
Full Nashorn bench
Version updates
Reduce to 1+1 rounds for awfully slow tests
Bump to 0.7.2 which properly skips on failed JUnit assumptions
Clojure method dispatch tests

Benchmarking Clojure is hard. Performance figures change rapidly with little code modifications.

I have a har dtime explaining why the tri morphic test is significantly slower than the megamorphic
one, while the code only differs in the data set. It should have been the converse.
DynamicObjects with structs in Clojure
Revert "DynamicObjects with structs in Clojure"

This test case compares against Golo structs, since it generates a real class, not some kind of
extensible object definition.

This reverts commit f947fc7274589dd847d4fc1b7a46b06e4c0fb34c.