Reactive programming introduces complexity, one which may not be needed in the future due to improved core tech.
Reactive programming introduces complexity, one which may not be needed in the future due to improved core tech.
https://github.com/netty/netty/issues/12816
It'll be interesting to see who (if anyone) picks up Netty's mantle in the Project Loom world.
Also, vert.x are already exploring how to adapt to the new threads model. (2)
1 - https://gist.github.com/vietj/fe9f886d489853ab07111ba5715b13...
Not trying to cast doubt... just noting that I have exactly the same feelings (hopes?) but I have yet to personally confirm it, in large part because it's not yet fully GA so we haven't jumped in with our production workloads.
Hot reloading (to the extend that change-save-refresh would feel like working with a python/ruby projects), shallow stack traces, less 'magic', , excellent documentation, plethora of modules, less memory footprint, milliseconds start/restart (owing to compile time wiring), first class container support, dev tools, always running tests are few that makes DX with Quarkus amazing.