As I read this, I kept thinking “thank you!” Though I do wish you had mentioned Scala, which I’m personally liking a hell of a lot better than Kotlin.
Sometimes I think the language being verbose makes programmers choose less meaningful class and variable names. For example, from a unit test I’ve been working on for one of my hobby projects:
ImaginaryQuadraticRing r = new ImaginaryQuadraticRing(d);
ImaginaryQuadraticInteger z = new ImaginaryQuadraticInteger(0, 1, r);
Of course I could just have NetBeans rename some of these. I appreciate how IntelliJ has more auto-complete, so I can just type
Ima and the suggestions pop up. And then after I type
new IntelliJ also helps fill in what I’m obviously going for.
However, I’m still learning how to take advantage of polymorphism in an actual project of mine rather than a toy example in a textbook. I have a faint idea of how
someClass obj = new subClass(); might be of use (though I might have gotten dyslexic on that one).
So for that reason the NetBeans programmers might have thought to not go as far on auto-complete as IntelliJ does.