> Reading these comments, it's strange to see that the "Java" paradigm/context issue still exists after all these years. > I have never had significant problem

> Reading these comments, it's strange to see that the "Java" paradigm/context issue still exists after all these years. > I have never had significant problems with Java-the-language. But, like with many other programming languages out there, you can't really dissociate the language from the environment and everything that goes with it. The paradigms, VMs, IDEs, patterns and practices etc etc. This is something I've been saying for years. Java, as a language, is great. But Java paradigms are fucking awful, and I don't understand why people use them. However, I'll confess that I'm naive, as I've never had to build anything larger than about 1,000 lines. Like...one of the patterns that I absolutely despise is the "Handler". So often, code is peppered with "MyHandler handler = new MyHandler(); handler.invoke(...);". If you have an object that consists of only a constructor and a single function, and is merely instantiated, called once, and then thrown away, why is this its own object? I see Java developers complain about stack traces that are 50+ function calls deep with half the functions in the stack named ".invoke()" or ".run()", and all I can think is how those wounds are self-inflicted.