4 ms·
You went from "Spring isn't a framework for frameworks" to "[the Spring framework] can play with every framework". I think OP got it right.
by stefan_ 5y ago
You went from "Spring isn't a framework for frameworks" to "[the Spring framework] can play with every framework". I think OP got it right.
- invalidname 5y agoLOL totally got me there ;-) Yes. I was talking about Spring Boot there. Yes, that wasn't clear. Spring is a framework and some of the elements within it abstract other tools some of which are frameworks in their own right (e.g. JPA/Hibernate). There are many abstractions but Spring sort of unifies them to a single "story" you can work with. JPA under Spring makes a lot more sense with the JPA Repository etc.
- MathCodeLove 5y agoI mean you do realize that many complex web apps use multiple frameworks for different things, right? Personally I don't like Java and haven't used spring, but take a modern web app and you could be using something like express/fastify, react + next, an ORM, a schema validator, and quite a bit of other domain specific pieces of functionality. Ofc these aren't all "frameworks" in the traditional sense, but that line is often arbitrary and I think this interpretation of OP's usage of the word is the most generous one.
- stefan_ 5y agoSure, you use a lot of frameworks - in parallel. But that's not what happens in Spring land. Instead, you get one framework (Spring) offering you an abstraction behind which another framework lurks, for things as large as say an ORM. Something that complex can of course not be hidden behind mere 1000s of Java interfaces, it all leaks horrendously and you find yourself "reaching through" the layers.