3 ms·
The only way it seems you can be effective with Java is with an IDE to do most of the heavy lifting. What would be better is if Java shipped with more focused c
by ryanseys 11y ago
The only way it seems you can be effective with Java is with an IDE to do most of the heavy lifting. What would be better is if Java shipped with more focused command-line tools and better defaults that allow me to productive immediately without the need to learn something as hefty as IntelliJ / Eclipse. This could lessen the barrier of entry to Java and widen community adoption.
- yogthos 11y agoOr you could just use modern JVM languages like Clojure.
- codarama 11y agoLisp? Lisp syntax makes less sense than lambda and stream which have ruined Java.
- EdwardDiego 11y agoI like Clojure, but anyway to make it start faster in a scripting context? I wrote the same script in Clojure and Kotlin, and the Kotlin one loads so much faster.
- yogthos 11y agoThere's Planck for OS X https://github.com/mfikes/planck https://github.com/mfikes/planck It uses JavaScriptCore and starts practically instantly. There's some work being done to port it to Linux/Windows as well. Here's an example: cat foo.cljs #!/usr/local/bin/planck (println "hello world: clojurescript -> planck -> as shell script") ./foo.cljs hello world: clojurescript -> planck -> as shell script Planck can be installed using homebrew now as well. Another promising option is Pixie https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie
- EdwardDiego 11y agoCheers mate :)
- EdwardDiego 11y agoWhat would you use instead of an IDE? Learning Intellij is a lot easier than learning Vim or Emacs.
- lmm 11y agoThe command-line tools are fine. And Java is the most adopted language in existence. The problem with writing Java without an IDE isn't one of tooling, it's that the language is so very verbose. They're working on that with lambdas and generics inference, but there's a limit to what you can do and remain backwards compatible.