3 ms·
For all the flack Java gets, it got something right on this topic imo. Take the lowest common denominator of language features (for a time), and have the soluti
by shados 8y ago
For all the flack Java gets, it got something right on this topic imo. Take the lowest common denominator of language features (for a time), and have the solution to almost everything be code written with those very, very few constructs. Yeah, it ends up verbose as hell, but even though I haven't done Java since the early 2000s, I can look at our backend code (which is all in modern Java), and short of a few new things like annotations and lambdas, I can read it just fine.
The problem space is very, VERY well understood. The patterns have been bikeshedded to death almost 20 years ago. It's super boring, there's not many interesting left, and it's awesome because of it. Of course, software engineers hate this in general because they get way too much enjoyment out of figuring out how to save 2 lines of code for their own good ;)
- pjmlp 8y agoThere are two things about Java syntax that are my sore points. Not having had the guts to make override a keyword, forcing the dumb @Override annotation. It is a matter of taste I know. But they could have made use of contextual keywords, thus keeping backwards compatibility. I really would like to have a typename kind of statement instead of making empty classes to simply typing with generic code.