If that were the case, yes, but it isn't. There are obviously some differences but there are clearly also uncanny similarities.
To be fair, it's nice to see you acknowledge that there are "obviously some differences". Some tiny little subtle differences like how in Ceylon, I can actually have two constructors that both initialize an immutable field. Like how constructor resolution is by (unambiguous) name and not by (potentially ambiguous) overloaded parameter types. Like how different constructors can delegate to distinct constructors of the superclass. 'Cos, y'know, other than that, it's really just a copy of Scala.
Absurd.
Man, seriously, there is such a thing as two people coming up with the same good idea independently. If you can't imagine such a thing happening, I'm at a total loss.
Note that I personally couldn't care less who invented what, I just wrote what I thought duaneb and stephen were getting at to clear up the confusion since you said "I guess I don't understand what you're saying here."
> I think what they're saying is that it's good to give credit where credit is due.
I don't think I was conflating. Or at least, if I misinterpreted, then so did at least one other person. Which suggests that the original comments were very open to such an interpretation.