6 ms·

> The overuse of design patterns, etc. Java has been trending away from this for some time now. A modern Spring app looks nothing like an old J2EE app.

dagw 5y ago
A lot of us jumped off the Java train in disgust at the height of the J2EE craze and never looked back, so fairly or unfairly we'll forever be judging everything Java by that tainted memory.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  A framework originally designed for Objective-C, actually.
  - tombert 5y ago
    Wait, is that true? I know WebObjects was designed around ObjC, but a quick ten seconds on Wikipedia doesn't indicate that J2EE was designed around ObjC initially. ---- Unnecessary opinion: I don't like either, but WebObjects sucks about 1/10th as much as J2EE.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      You should have spent more than ten seconds. > By the time DOE, now known as NEO, was released in 1995, Sun had already moved on to Java as their next big thing. Java was now the GUI of choice for client-side applications, and Sun's OpenStep plans were quietly dropped (see Lighthouse Design). NEO was re-positioned as a Java system with the introduction of the "Joe" framework, but it saw little use. Components of NEO and Joe were eventually subsumed into Enterprise JavaBeans. Taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Objects_Everywhere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Objects_Everywhere
      - tombert 5y ago
        Ah, I was just quickly reading on the J2EE wikipedia entry and didn't see "Objective" anywhere on there. You're absolutely right, thank you for clarifying!
        pjmlp 5y ago
        No issues, and here is another one, while Java might have a C++ like syntax to make it more appealing to mainstream, its main influence was Objective-C, not C++. https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/java-objc.html https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/java-objc.html Hence interfaces, dynamic loading, reflection and so forth.
        tombert 5y ago
        Interesting. Bringing it back to a previous point I made, I met someone who claimed to have helped port over the WebObjects framework from Objective-C to Java, and he claimed that while it's not a 1-to-1, you can fairly easily map a lot of the Objective-C semantics to Java, making the porting process not that hard.
        pjmlp 5y ago
        Yes, they are quite close. Objective-C related content, https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/LegacyTechnologies/WebObjects/WebObjects_4.5/System/Library/Frameworks/WebObjects.framework/ObjC_classic/WebObjects.pdf https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Le... Java variant, https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/LegacyTechnologies/WebObjects/WebObjects_4.5/System/Documentation/Developer/WebObjects/DevGuide/WebObjectsDevGuide.pdf https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Le...
- smrtinsert 5y ago
  Yep spring since 1.12 here.
fsdjkflsjfsoij 5y ago
Modern Spring Boot is still incredibly bloated and full of questionable design patterns. A simple web application should not consume hundreds of megabytes of RAM by default and startup time on modern hardware should be basically instantaneous. Classpath scanning and annotations are still massively overused and most of the time they're accomplishing little more than obfuscation and turning compile time errors into runtime errors.
- kaba0 5y ago
  Why exactly? How often do you start up a web application? And it’s not like the RAM is not there to use it — thread pools, db connection pools, etc have to be set up.

dagw 5y ago

A lot of us jumped off the Java train in disgust at the height of the J2EE craze and never looked back, so fairly or unfairly we'll forever be judging everything Java by that tainted memory.

pjmlp 5y ago
A framework originally designed for Objective-C, actually.
- tombert 5y ago
  Wait, is that true? I know WebObjects was designed around ObjC, but a quick ten seconds on Wikipedia doesn't indicate that J2EE was designed around ObjC initially. ---- Unnecessary opinion: I don't like either, but WebObjects sucks about 1/10th as much as J2EE.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    You should have spent more than ten seconds. > By the time DOE, now known as NEO, was released in 1995, Sun had already moved on to Java as their next big thing. Java was now the GUI of choice for client-side applications, and Sun's OpenStep plans were quietly dropped (see Lighthouse Design). NEO was re-positioned as a Java system with the introduction of the "Joe" framework, but it saw little use. Components of NEO and Joe were eventually subsumed into Enterprise JavaBeans. Taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Objects_Everywhere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Objects_Everywhere
    - tombert 5y ago
      Ah, I was just quickly reading on the J2EE wikipedia entry and didn't see "Objective" anywhere on there. You're absolutely right, thank you for clarifying!
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        No issues, and here is another one, while Java might have a C++ like syntax to make it more appealing to mainstream, its main influence was Objective-C, not C++. https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/java-objc.html https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/java-objc.html Hence interfaces, dynamic loading, reflection and so forth.
        tombert 5y ago
        Interesting. Bringing it back to a previous point I made, I met someone who claimed to have helped port over the WebObjects framework from Objective-C to Java, and he claimed that while it's not a 1-to-1, you can fairly easily map a lot of the Objective-C semantics to Java, making the porting process not that hard.
        pjmlp 5y ago
        Yes, they are quite close. Objective-C related content, https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/LegacyTechnologies/WebObjects/WebObjects_4.5/System/Library/Frameworks/WebObjects.framework/ObjC_classic/WebObjects.pdf https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Le... Java variant, https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/LegacyTechnologies/WebObjects/WebObjects_4.5/System/Documentation/Developer/WebObjects/DevGuide/WebObjectsDevGuide.pdf https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Le...
smrtinsert 5y ago
Yep spring since 1.12 here.

fsdjkflsjfsoij 5y ago

Modern Spring Boot is still incredibly bloated and full of questionable design patterns. A simple web application should not consume hundreds of megabytes of RAM by default and startup time on modern hardware should be basically instantaneous. Classpath scanning and annotations are still massively overused and most of the time they're accomplishing little more than obfuscation and turning compile time errors into runtime errors.

kaba0 5y ago
Why exactly? How often do you start up a web application? And it’s not like the RAM is not there to use it — thread pools, db connection pools, etc have to be set up.