A modern programming language that makes developers happier.

kotlinlang

<@U2E974ELT> I think you'll like that change. :point_up:

Also, I believe the name `primitive class` is less confusing for value types, and `inline class` makes more sense for Kotlin's usage.

Not really. We though that we could rename Kotlin inline classes to "JVM Primitive" classes, since that would exactly explain what Kotlin inline classes are about -- they are compiled into the corresponding JVM primitives. Now the "primitive class" in JVM is extremely confusing name choice, since they are not primitive -- they can be complex, composite entities. The only upside for us here is that we can now continue using the word "inline", maybe.

But `inline` wasn't a good name for type values either, do you agree?
Shouldn't value types be called `struct`s as in C, C++ and Swift? I think that is more self-explanatory to what it is.

Regarding Kotlin inline classes, I think the `inline` keyword is alright, I read it like "usages of this class will be inlined whenever possible to the wrapped type". A `@JvmPrimitive` annotation would limit it to the JVM while it can work in JS and possibly other targets. Maybe you have something different in mind though?

It is really not simple. I am not surprised that Java struggles for a good name so long, too