[Alupis]

> The contribution graph would suggest otherwise

The contribution graph says precisely what I claimed.

> Then what is the selling point of that, if you say crucial features are not closed-sourced and gated behind costly licensing

Each vendor can do what they want. As I have already said twice, some vendors give away their inhouse-built JVM/JDK and only charge for support, some charge to use it at all, and some just give it away entirely for free. Motivations for each vary by company.

The point is, you have a ton of choice within the JVM ecosystem. You have 1 choice for .NET... the ecosystem and community are not the same. The JVM ecosystem and community are vastly better by any measurement.

C# developer's only valid criticisms are levied at the Java language - failing to realize the slow development pace is deliberate and prevents people from having to rewrite everything every couple years...

Despite that, there are many languages that run on the JVM - so you don't even need to use Java to experience the greatness of the JVM ecosystem and community.

[neonsunset]

I'd rather not experience "the greatness of the JVM ecosystem and community" nor I have to rewrite code every two years, the only big break was ~8 years ago with .NET Framework -> FOSS .NET ordeal, all subsequent changes are minor and incremental and pretty much in the libraries only. In general, this view is unfortunate but not unexpected, and is common with Java or, for some reason, Go.

There's a world of different projects, beyond back-end applications, written in C# or even F# like games, scientific instrumentation and analysis, desktop and mobile applications (multi-platform or otherwise), trading systems, malware and anti-malware, and more. It's a really versatile and powerful tool.

Let's talk again when the project Valhalla is done and Panama vectors are actually usable for writing implementations that can compete with C++.