3 ms·
Of all the features most Java devs (and ex-Java devs) desire, algebraic types are near the bottom. How about intersection and union types? (NO, sealed classes
by owlstuffing 3y ago
Of all the features most Java devs (and ex-Java devs) desire, algebraic types are near the bottom.
How about intersection and union types? (NO, sealed classes are not a substitute for unions).
But, yeah, in my view JDK 21 is a a disappointment. I rarely want pattern matching, but I would like properties please and records are nice, but actual tuples are more useful. Etc.
- smrtinsert 3y agoI would love a union type in Java, but I still enjoy the language, community and especially development experience. I wouldn't recommend it for everything, but it's sturdy by design and enjoyable for when it fits.
- mu53 3y ago[dead]
- mx_02 3y agoI'd love if interfaces worked as in typescript. As long as the object signature matches the interface as parameter then you can use it.
- owlstuffing 3y agoCheck out project manifold, it’s a compiler plugin for Java. Among other amazing features it adds structural typing [1], which is essentially interfaces typescript interfaces. 1. https://github.com/manifold-systems/manifold/tree/master/manifold-deps-parent/manifold-ext#structural-interfaces-via-structural https://github.com/manifold-systems/manifold/tree/master/man...