UnFroMage

6 ms·

1.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
Once minified and gzipped it's less than 200K. But yeah, I can see how a packing command would be useful with program analysis, except that'd rule out any use of the metamodel for dynamic programming.
2.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
Probably not easily because no JVM language has compatible lambdas types, but ideally in the future I'd love to be able to.
3.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
> but software is about trust and I do not trust somebody like Gavin King for delivering a good language after Hibernate :) Perhaps it's just a joke, but if it's not: sure you're entitled to dislike Hibernate and prefer ot
4.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
> But claiming it is anywhere near Kotlin's is just preposterous. The only example you give is that they don't have their own standard library. I agree it's a difference, but you really think that makes it worlds apart? I
5.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
Ceylon has an IntelliJ plugin in the works that builds on the solid foundation of the Eclipse plugin, so it's picking up features really fast. It should be out in a few months.
6.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
Ceylon also has excellent Java/JVM (and JavaScript) interop. You should try it :)
7.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
Don't forget that, running on the JVM with great interop means that any Ceylon program has instant access to a huge ecosystem, including not just Java libraries but also Scala libraries. I was able to use Apache Spark in Ceylon ;)
8.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
> The level of interoperability, though, is radically different from Kotlin's There's no truth in that. Sure, it's possible that there are some differences in how we both do interop, and that some things are easier in one
9.
by UnFroMage 11y ago
> - reified generics -- This is apparently expensive on the JVM: http://blog.jetbrains.com/kotlin/2014/12/m10-is-out/ FTR I am not sure I believe that explanation. I was with Gavin a few years ago whe