If it is just syntactic sugar that has to create a class under the hood, it's just lipstick on a pig's turd.
If you can't have other top-level functions in Java, then it's a special case, which is ugly.
If you can't have other top-level functions in Java, then it's a special case, which is ugly.
Decompiled example: https://lab.razor.fyi/#41rAyMUVUJSfXpSYq5dcLDSRsbQ4My9dIbiyu...
> lipstick on a pig's turd
There are several valuable compiler transformations that happen under the hood in languages like this. Closures as types, iterator/generator functions, async state machines. This is just another example.
I assumed this meant that you could have free functions, but you're saying you can ONLY have `main` as a free function? Ok, then I agree this is also garbage.
```Top-level members are interpreted as members of the unnamed class, so we can also write the program as:
String greeting() { return "Hello, World!"; }
void main() { System.out.println(greeting()); }```
I write "return 0" at the end of main in all my programs if that end is reachable.