Companion Object is also terminology that is shared/borrowed from Scala scala 😉

@jkbbwr You actually type

co<TAB>object {<enter>

? I just type

co<ArrowDown><TAB>

😉, but that's only in my IDE

@louiscad Sometimes I click on the menu item. Shock

Is there any specific reason why this kotlin code is invalid?

The message Im getting says theres nothing to override

override var

overrides fields, not methods

I haven't tried, but maybe this works?

var context: Context
  override set()
  override get()

I had tried that but i get a jvm signature conflict

I think it would just be

override fun getContext() { }

no?

can’t apply override to getters and setters, I don’t think

yeah that works but i was hoping to not have to declare the getters / setters and backing field

The IDE wants me to do this

@marcoferrer you can use this

override lateinit var context:Context

@smilecs still get the same error

You're out of luck here, this is a known problem/limitation/design-choice whatever. What you can do is this:

class TestBean(private var context) : SomeJavaInterface {
    override fun getContext(): Context  = context
    override fun setContext(_context: Context) { this.context = _context }
}

@gildor commented on @marcoferrer’s file https://kotlinlang.slack.com/files/U41NT8LUW/F85TXM9HQ/-.kt: Known limitation - https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issueMobile/KT-6653

(non-mobile link: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-6653)

@cedric Odersky's devoxx talk says the perception that Scala is big is wrong.. kind of interesting.. 🙂

@codeslubber Is that the talk where he still argues that grammar size is a measure of a language’s complexity? 🙂

it's only from a few weeks ago I think

that was one of his arguments

I don't really agree with the argument that Scala is a kitchen sink language,

the other anti argument I have heard here is that it's big downfall is implicits

too much magic is the argument

would be interesting to have a language panel discussion/debate

Something I found quite strange in that keynote is that he’s adding a brand new way to specify implicits in Dotty because he realized that passing implicit arguments is very important in a lot of cases, not realizing that fields in classes already solve that problem, and much more elegantly than the implicit function that he’s proposing, in my opinion

ok so I also thought

that was kind of fascinating

I was wondering whether others saw that as a very late

attempt to say 'oh DI, we did that a decade and a half ago, and now we will make it even easier and more tucked in...'