The idea might be enough. Lots of companies running legacy code would be interested in this idea since it would make maintaining/patching it easy.

Thank you for your response. I will take your valuable feedback into careful consideration.

Yoy won’t find your target audience here on lemmy.

Instead you should look for companies that have open job/freelancer positions for maintaining legacy java code and pitch your project to them.

That’s a great idea. Thank you. However, I’m not sure if such opportunities would be available at my current stage.

Please check this post: Making your Java code null-safe without rewriting

"Yeah, Kotlin. The real The End", just kidding :)

AFAIK Kotlin and Java code can co-exist as source level. Never tried it though. I guess it depends on the end case scenario what to use.

JPlus retains almost all of Java’s syntax while providing conveniences like null checks, allowing Java developers to use it immediately without additional learning. In contrast, Kotlin can utilize Java classes but requires learning Kotlin syntax and its libraries, and it cannot use Java syntax directly or automatically guarantee null safety. Therefore, JPlus offers a distinct advantage over Kotlin.

Things can get confusing if the explanation is too long, so here’s a concise way to put it.

It’s not entirely clear whether Groovy includes 100% of Java syntax, but in my view, Groovy focuses on enhancing the language itself, addressing areas where it falls short compared to modern languages.

On the other hand, JPlus is similar to how TypeScript addresses JavaScript’s lack of type safety: it focuses on strengthening Java’s safety while improving developer convenience through features like boilerplate code generation. Importantly, JPlus code always compiles down to standard Java, which means it can be integrated seamlessly into existing Java projects without changing the build environment or toolchain.

In short:

Groovy: Focuses on enhancing the expressive power of Java, adding modern language features and syntactic flexibility.

JPlus: Focuses on enhancing language safety and developer convenience, while maintaining full compatibility with Java. This allows developers to adopt JPlus without worrying about breaking existing Java projects.

From Wikipedia:

In computer science, a preprocessor (or precompiler)[1] is a program that processes its input data to produce output that is used as input in another program. […], which is often used by some subsequent programs like compilers.

The emphasis is mine.

Both Typescript and SASS are examples of preprocessors.

By that logic, the C compiler would also be a preprocessor since it converts C code into assembly. Simply calling something a preprocessor just because its output is source code is not logically correct. The same applies to JPlus: the fact that it ultimately produces Java source code does not make it a preprocessor. Internally, it performs compiler-level processes such as AST generation, null-safety checks, and boilerplate code generation, so it should be regarded as a proper compiler.

This isn’t an accusation, but was this comment written with AI? There’s a glaring logical error here which I think a human would catch easily, but an LLM (which is just a natural language generator, not a logic processor) could possibly overlook.

Specifically, your arguments don’t really make a lot of sense. They’re also not targeted at my claim. It reads more like a defense of JPlus. To which I want to clarify, I merely took issue with the specific claim I quoted, I wasn’t trying to say there’s no point to JPlus. There’s no need to defend JPlus in general. So I’m going to dismiss runtime behaviors since that has nothing to do with the syntax.

Things can get confusing if the explanation is too long, so here’s a concise way to put it.

It’s not entirely clear whether Groovy includes 100% of Java syntax, but in my view, Groovy focuses on enhancing the language itself, addressing areas where it falls short compared to modern languages.

On the other hand, JPlus is similar to how TypeScript addresses JavaScript’s lack of type safety: it focuses on strengthening Java’s safety while improving developer convenience through features like boilerplate code generation. Importantly, JPlus code always compiles down to standard Java, which means it can be integrated seamlessly into existing Java projects without changing the build environment or toolchain.

In short:

Groovy: Focuses on enhancing the expressive power of Java, adding modern language features and syntactic flexibility.

JPlus: Focuses on enhancing language safety and developer convenience, while maintaining full compatibility with Java. This allows developers to adopt JPlus without worrying about breaking existing Java projects.

Kotlin isn’t a superset, you can’t just compile a java file with kotlin and have it work afaik. That seems to be the point here.

This is more like a preprocessor anyway, like SASS to CSS. The compiler spits out Java source code, not jvm bytecode.

Exactly, as you said, Kotlin isn’t a Java superset. you can’t just compile a Java file with Kotlin and have it work. JPlus works similarly in that it outputs standard Java source code rather than JVM bytecode.

However, JPlus is not merely a “preprocessor.” It actually parses Java source like a compiler, performs null-safety checks and boilerplate code generation on the generated parse tree, and finally produces standard Java code. In that sense, JPlus should be considered a compiler. The only difference is that its output is Java code; if the code generation step were extended to produce JVM bytecode directly, it could bypass the Java source entirely and generate bytecode straightaway.

The key point is that, just like TypeScript addresses JavaScript’s lack of type safety, JPlus fills in some of Java’s gaps. It allows you to keep almost all of your existing Java code while adding features like null-safety and automatic boilerplate generation, improving both safety and developer convenience.

There’s Groovy. Their examples use a bit different syntax, like a lack of semicolons, and Gradle might also give the wrong idea. But it’s fully compatible with Java source code iirc, just adds its own stuff on top and broadens the allowed syntax a bit.

Groovy is highly compatible with Java and most Java code runs in Groovy without changes. However, it’s not 100% identical. Groovy introduces dynamic typing, additional syntax, and runtime behaviors that can differ from Java. JPlus, on the other hand, aims to keep Java syntax almost intact while adding null-safety and boilerplate code generation making it easier to apply to existing Java projects without rewriting code

Notably, there is currently no ‘superset’ language that keeps Java syntax almost intact

There’s groovy iirc.

Groovy is highly compatible with Java and most Java code runs in Groovy without changes. However, it’s not 100% identical. Groovy introduces dynamic typing, additional syntax, and runtime behaviors that can differ from Java. JPlus, on the other hand, aims to keep Java syntax almost intact while adding null-safety and boilerplate code generation making it easier to apply to existing Java projects without rewriting code

Isn’t kotlin a better option?

Kotlin is great for null-safety, but JPlus allows you to enforce null-safety without rewriting your existing Java code, which can be easier for teams working in legacy projects or who prefer staying in pure Java.