[ErotemeObelus]

I think it's a syntax problem. ASCII doesn't have enough bracket characters to simply & clearly represent necessary language features. So it's harder for an intelligent human to sort and categorize these aspects.

Pre-generics Java is about the appropriate amount of language complexity for our current lingua franca

[AdieuToLogic]

> Pre-generics Java is about the appropriate amount of language complexity for our current lingua franca

I am not sure to whom you are referencing as being "our", so I can only say I disagree as there are many developers which are quite adept in languages having more complexity than "pre-generics Java."

Perhaps you meant to reply to a different comment?

[pjmlp]

It surely isn't mine, otherwise I wouldn't be happily using Java 13 right now.

Also even Google does have more stuff going on Java, C++, Dart, Kotlin and TypeScript than Go, which has more uptake outside Googleplex.

[erik_seaberg]

Java is tolerably mediocre now but vintage 1996 Java was awful (and slow). I enjoy Scala, but even I can see why it's more than most of the industry is ready for. If there's a sweet spot, Kotlin seems close to it.

[coldtea]

Err, we had 10x times the features of "Pre-generics Java" even in 1970s Lisp and Smalltalk...

[Gene_Parmesan]

I will gladly trade a little bit more language complexity if it means the complexity of the code that I write using that language is simpler.

[erik_seaberg]

This. When a platform refuses to solve a problem, that problem doesn't go away. The users are forced to roll their own solutions, none of which have the same test coverage and optimization opportunities.

[EdwardDiego]

Generics don't make Java that much more complex for your workaday Java coding.

[jjoonathan]

Speak for yourself.