3 ms·
That was why I picked it awhile back. I hate that most Java development these days has a large component that deals with writing XML. It allowed me to focus o
by jmspring 3y ago
That was why I picked it awhile back. I hate that most Java development these days has a large component that deals with writing XML. It allowed me to focus on the code I needed to write and not figure out what parts I needed to cobble together.
- matsemann 3y agoAre you comparing to legacy java applications? Haven't written xml in soon a decade in spring boot.
- rrrix1 3y agoWhat do you define as "Legacy?" I groan every time I come across a Maven project, which AFAIK isn't quite yet "legacy." What about dependecy management, testing, building, and all of the other non-java-code bits? Gradle only goes so far in my limited experience. The non-Java parts of Java development are what repeatedly get me to choose Go, Ruby, Python, TypeScript/node.js, etc. The tooling is magnitudes easier to use. Genuinely curious! Thx. (edit: typo)
- vips7L 3y agoNot who you are replying to but I would define legacy as any project that is doing spring di and wiring the project together with XML (excluding Pom for maven building), rather than annotations or raw Java code. Or anyone still deploying to an application server.
- cryptos 3y agoBut the project configuration has nothing to do with the web framework. You can use Javalin with Maven (and therefore XML), too. And you can use Spring without any XML by configuring the project with Gradle's Kotlin DSL. Modern Java development is not what it was 20 years ago.
- jmspring 3y agoGo to most Spring Boot pages or examples, XML is in your face. "legacy"? Modern examples still push the xml injection bs.
- hanszarkov 3y agoThis isn't factual, Spring and Boot have been 100% annotation configurable for almost a decade. The Spring documentation I read has zero XML.
- matsemann 3y agoNo, they don't. There is some xml in getting dependencies through maven, perhaps. But that's not really a huge issue.