|
|
|
|
|
by aembleton
3886 days ago
|
|
Yes, and that is really important when it comes to language use. The more people who use the language, the more it can develop and the more libraries that can be built for it. The other advantage of Kotlin is that it builds on top of the existing Java code base. Java has had decades to build up an ecosystem of frameworks and libraries. Kotlin builds on these with excellent interop. |
|
From what I can see, Ceylon has a blend of strengths that should make it appeal to a certain segment of the market. On one hand, it's a fresh start and has a lot of the cleanness and terseness that I like from Kotlin. On the other, Gavin is clearly very much into type systems and type theory, and Ceylon has a more complex/powerful type system than Kotlin does.
I'll admit that I'm not totally sure whether the additional complexity is worth it, but I'm very open to being persuaded.
So it seems to me like Ceylon should appeal to people who currently like Scala or Haskell and push the type systems to the limit, but really want something without historical baggage like XML literals and other oddities. And I'm sure there are plenty of programmers like that.
The real question will be interop costs. Kotlin doesn't have any and that's the main reason people can consider it in existing projects, or introduction inside large corporations. Ceylon takes a more Scala-like approach where it has its own standard library, its own collections, etc.