3 ms·

With Lombok I always felt that it was trying to fix a symptom while it ignored the underlying problem. If you don't like to write out getters and setters in you

With Lombok I always felt that it was trying to fix a symptom while it ignored the underlying problem. If you don't like to write out getters and setters in your code, then consider not to implement them at all. Just use value classes with public fields. Or nowadays you can also use records. Some people use the argument that the advantage of getters/setters is, that you can add custom logic to them. But IMO that is an antipattern. And even more so if you then hide that enriched setter or getter using Lombok. Code should indicate to the readers what is doing, it shouldn't try to hide stuff that could be important.

sverhagen 4y ago
I feel that when I programmed in C++ before I went to Java, it was much more common to include more logic in your setters than just assigning the argument to the field. This is now almost twenty years ago, I was less experienced and the team I was on where I was writing C++ was small and inexperienced too, so maybe that's a misconception. But certainly, in Java the additional logic in setters is frowned upon; but so are public fields. So, it's really a cultural thing in that community. Thank goodness for records :)