4 ms·

> Java SDK Hardly. See Joda Time (it only took 10 years for java.time to catch up) and Apache Commons (the situation is much better now, but who hasn't turned

> Java SDK Hardly. See Joda Time (it only took 10 years for java.time to catch up) and Apache Commons (the situation is much better now, but who hasn't turned to Apache Commons due to shortcomings in Java's standard library?). In any case, I definitely agree with the frustrations of trying to find libraries for Ruby.

coldtea 12y ago
Again, people have seem to miss the point I was making. I wrote that those batteries "might not be 100% perfect" -- and as a Java programmer back in the '00s, I know the specific problem points with Java time that Joda tried to solve (btw, it has inspired the time lib in the latest SDKs IIRC). The thing is, the JDK APIs, with all their issues have been a genuine force in Java adoption, and something every Java programmer relies on. Of course there'll be some pain points, but it's nothing like having to hunt for a Collections or DB abstraction or String manipulation or XML etc lib each and every time you start a project. Having an official batteries API doesn't preclude you from using external libs (like Joda) when they are better -- whereas not having one is a genuine loss. If I have turned to Apache Commons that was overwhelmingly for things MISSING from the SDK, not for things the SDK already did. And don't get me started on the Commons code quality, with BS reinventions of the wheel, lame FactoryFactoryProxyFactorySingletonFlyweightFacades and the like, and code that was blisfully ignorant of enconding issues...