3 ms·

A lot of these are no-gos anyway from a backwards compatibility perspective (many of which being entirely syntactical), and they're already in Kotlin, so I'm no

A lot of these are no-gos anyway from a backwards compatibility perspective (many of which being entirely syntactical), and they're already in Kotlin, so I'm not sure why you wouldn't just use that. A couple I could potentially see making their way into Java though.

exabrial 3y ago
Exactly my thoughts. Let Java be Java. It's not that I disagree with most of them I just don't think it needs to have every bell, whistle, and doodad either. Simplicity is beauty.
- Aaron2222 3y ago
  No point completely reshaping Java into something that's already on the JVM anyway.