4 ms·

Can you elaborate more? I honestly can't think of a time I have been unable to do what I want in Java without frameworks, but I've obviously not tried to do eve

• hurril 3y ago
  If you were a CTO, would you have your team write the store backend in pure Java? Being able to solve AoC in it doesn't really matter.
  • pshirshov 3y ago
    Works great with pure Scala.
    • hurril 3y ago
      Definitely! But not with Java and JavaScript.
      • pshirshov 3y ago
        I don't see why. Both are less exprissive, yes, but you still can have a small mini-framework which you can control (something alike to Micronaut).
        • hurril 3y ago
          Sure. But since the point has to do with how Java compares to alternatives when it comes to needing frameworks in the first place, this doesn't add to your point. It detracts from it.
  • discreteevent 3y ago
    > If you were a CTO, would you have your team write the store backend in pure Java? You could make this argument about ruby or python. It is quite different to saying "Java is Duplo, presented with Lego problems it is simply unable"
  • mrkeen 3y ago
    > would you have your team write the store backend in pure Java? We do that. We just call it a SpringStoreBackend.
    • hurril 3y ago
      So cool of you!
      • mrkeen 3y ago
        And that's pretty much the CTO's response, isn't it? Write 2000 lines of pure Java storage -> you should have used a framework. But write 2000 lines of Spring storage -> nothing to see here.
        • hurril 3y ago
          Which happens to be my point.
  • pringk02 3y ago
    I'd be happy to consider it. There are a number of good technical and non-technical advantages: * Strong, mature eco-system * VM-based so we can easily change OS and/or other dev-ops related params. * Large hiring pool with lots of experience in it (at least this is the case locally) * More performant than Python, which would maybe be the next language that hits all three of these points. Your counter-question also deflects and doesn't answer my original question: what problems can not be solved in Java without frameworks? What are examples of lego problems and duplo problems? Maybe it's a misreading on my part, but I would interpret a "duplo" language as one I could not even build a framework in, due to a lack of low-level control.
    • hurril 3y ago
      You are answering a different question. Opting for Java is smart, albeit incredibly boring. Doing so is basically choosing to go with Spring Boot, at the same time. You are going to do that because the Java programmers need it, Java needs it and if you don't, as another writer here said: you'll be writing all the frameworks yourself and at considerable cost. So hating frameworks and picking Java is a dubious position.
      • rcxdude 3y ago
        You are basically just saying 'java frameworks are mandatory' and then when people are saying 'I've done java without frameworks' (I am also one of those. I'm not primarily a java programmer, but every time I've used java I have used it without frameworks), you're saying 'nu-uh'. You're not going to convince people out of their own experience this way.
        • hurril 3y ago
          Not really. "I did Java in a serious project without frameworks once" is not a counter to: Java needs frameworks to be generally useful. I am not trying to convince anyone, I'm stating the case that Java and Java programmers need frameworks in a way that more modern programmming languages don't. And that this is why it looks the way it does. My theory thus explains reality. Do you have a counter to my claim? As in: do you have many examples of companies now that use Java without having gone with Spring Boot (or basically invented it themselves?) I did Java for a mindnumbing decade, for god's sake. Then I stayed around the JVM for another decade writing in Scala. But! This is not an argument from authority here, I'm merely trying to add some context here lest you think that I am a .NET warrior or simply hate Java from a C++ distance. I am not.