Hacker News Reader

> 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.

There have been at least two mostly disconnected "Java"s for the last 15+ years. The job descriptions used to be very clear about. There were "Core Java" positions and "Enterprise Java" ones. Very different communities, different libraries (remember the revelation that the LMAX Disruptor was for example?) etc. The developers spoilt by the experience with Scala/Kotlin probably count as a third group now.

You choose weird examples. I don’t know how VS can be considered slow when it only has one real competitor - JB Rider - and that competitor offers C# support. Also, I’d there a language that competes with C# that doesn’t also have some form of “assembly hell”?

> VS [...] has one real competitor - JB Rider

There is one other non-VS, non-Rider alternative: Visual Studio for Mac.

You conclude with:

> Those are all fair points, but more often than not, they have little-to-nothing to do with current discussion.

but earlier you noted that:

> you can't really dissociate the language from the environment

So it seems like a self-contradictory position.

Why would it seem that way?

Why can't I say:

"I like how C# implements XYZ"

instead of

"I don't like the C# development environment, but I like how C# implements XYZ"?

What value is there in qualifying every aspect of a discussion given that you cannot fully dissociate <A> from <B>?