You must not write much Kotlin then? It’s far more than sugar when a language fixes core issues in another.
It’s a modern, statically typed language that addresses many of Java’s longstanding limitations with robust type safety, expressive functional features, coroutine-based concurrency, and extensibility — all integrated natively. Interoperability with Java is a strength, not a sign of dependency.
Calling Kotlin merely syntactic sugar is like saying Swift is just Objective-C with prettier syntax — it misses the deep improvements in language design, safety, and developer experience.
I’ve written a fair amount, enough to know it’s a significant improvement on Java, but that it still suffers from the unnecessary abstraction in the standard library. And that’s pretty much my main problem with Java.
Swift is a different story because the main issue with Objective C is the syntax.
Sure, and Kotlin is largely syntax sugar for Java. It’s certainly nicer, but the semantics are largely the same.
You must not write much Kotlin then? It’s far more than sugar when a language fixes core issues in another.
It’s a modern, statically typed language that addresses many of Java’s longstanding limitations with robust type safety, expressive functional features, coroutine-based concurrency, and extensibility — all integrated natively. Interoperability with Java is a strength, not a sign of dependency.
Calling Kotlin merely syntactic sugar is like saying Swift is just Objective-C with prettier syntax — it misses the deep improvements in language design, safety, and developer experience.
I’ve written a fair amount, enough to know it’s a significant improvement on Java, but that it still suffers from the unnecessary abstraction in the standard library. And that’s pretty much my main problem with Java.
Swift is a different story because the main issue with Objective C is the syntax.