Vladimir>Quidem, CalciteAssert Michael>If you want to propose removing either of these, we could have a Michael>discussion about it, but you're talking about code which is already Michael>heavily used throughout Calcite.
The point of "we assume contributors are good at Java, thus we must keep the code to be Java-only" is weak. New contributors will likely see Quidem and CalciteAssert for the first time, and Java knowledge does not help there. It does not imply that languages like Quidem and/or CalciteAssert are a bad fit for their job, but it is wrong to judge based solely on "it is not Java". Michael>The consensus from the discussion you started seems to be that Michael>Kotlin should not be added to the tests It is not like that. Michael>I agree that for these specific tests, readability is improved That is exactly my point. There's an improvement, the downsides are small, so I just committed it. Michael>But many tests require more than this That is to be discussed on a test by test basis (or use-case by use-case). For instance, strings (especially, multi-line ones) with $ is an issue for Kotlin for now. Vladimir
