4 ms·
I think you're missing that Maven does actually solve the rvm/nvm/pyenv problem. You can specify the bytecode version in the config and compile/run any backward
by tootie 5y ago
I think you're missing that Maven does actually solve the rvm/nvm/pyenv problem. You can specify the bytecode version in the config and compile/run any backward compatible version. Your actual JDK need only be new enough, not an exact match and it doesn't need to change between projects. I have never had a single compiler or runtime version compatibility issue even with native dependencies ever with Java. The IDE situation can have some subtle edge cases, but no other language (save C#) actually gains so much utility from an IDE. Stack traces, break points, runtime inspection and profiling are all nearly flawless in IntelliJ (or Visual Studio) in ways that are monstrously difficult with any dynamic language.
- Tainnor 5y agoYes, but now you're not comparing maven vs. Bundler, you're comparing statically vs. dynamically typed languages. It's almost impossible to get the strong guarantees you get in a statically typed language in a dynamically typed one. If that's the discussion you want to have, well, I personally also prefer statically typed languages, but that's beyond the point. That said, I've had issues, e.g. on CI, that didn't manifest locally because of a mismatch in Java versions (something with JAXB, IIRC), and Java is maybe sometimes a bit too cavalier about the issue.