Live data from Hacker News

Java is still worth learning

empatheticdeveloper.wordpress.com

11–20 of 82 posts

Re: Java is still worth learning

#11
I’ve been working as a backend developer for close to six years now, but reading this brought me right back to college.

Like many others, I started with C. It taught me the basics - memory, pointers, writing data structures from scratch - but most of the time it felt like I was just trying not to break things. Solving problems became more about handling the language than understanding the logic.

Then I came across Java, and something just clicked. It felt structured, readable, and intentional. Almost like reading good English. For the first time, I could focus on the actual problem instead of building the tools to solve it. Collections, built-in libraries, and a reliable runtime made coding feel productive, not just painful.

Even now, years later, Java still feels like home. It’s not perfect, but it gave me the space to learn, grow, and build things that last. I really appreciated this article - it captures that quiet strength Java has, and the care so many people have put into making it better over time. It reminded me why I still enjoy writing Java after all these years.

Re: Java is still worth learning

#12

Advocating that people use either Quarkus or Spring is like advocating they build their stuff in COBOL. Java is an alright language by itself, but the "EE" frameworks and the ecosystem that surrounds them are corrosive to good software. You are actively harming your brain by learning JavaEE. If you do that to new developers you deserve to have your beans turn undiscoverable on Christmas Eve.

Spring and Quarkus are not Java EE.

Yeah, they are "jakarta EE" now. Or what do you mean?

Re: Java is still worth learning

#13
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spring and Quarkus are not Java EE.

Yeah, they are "jakarta EE" now. Or what do you mean?

Spring has some compatibility shims for EE but my understanding is it’s always been its own thing and was originally formed in reaction to EE

Re: Java is still worth learning

#14
The further away you are from VC money, the more "boring" technologies like Java make sense.

Whole careers have been built on producing CRUD web applications with Java on the backend and Angular on the frontend.

It's not exciting, but so is life without income in countries where this line of work is something to aspire to. I should know, as I live in such a country.

Re: Java is still worth learning

#15
If Java can be compiled into a single binary and have a package manager then I would learn it.

I really want to like Java, or JVM-based languages specifically, but its extremely annoying and complicated to figure out how and why thing works.

Re: Java is still worth learning

#16
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spring and Quarkus are not Java EE.

Yeah, they are "jakarta EE" now. Or what do you mean?

Spring is not „jackarta EE“, it’s compatible with some of EE specs (a good thing), but otherwise it’s just a different framework.

Re: Java is still worth learning

#17

Advocating that people use either Quarkus or Spring is like advocating they build their stuff in COBOL. Java is an alright language by itself, but the "EE" frameworks and the ecosystem that surrounds them are corrosive to good software. You are actively harming your brain by learning JavaEE. If you do that to new developers you deserve to have your beans turn undiscoverable on Christmas Eve.

These days you'd typically use Spring Boot, which is a layer over Spring that simplifies its use significantly. As others have pointed out, none of this is JavaEE.

Frameworks like Spring are absolutely essential for many kinds of business software. Sure, there are slightly more focused alternatives like Micronaut (and Quarkus for that matter), but they tend to have more specific use cases.

In practice, teams that try to write real-world business systems without such frameworks end up with a spaghettified mess that just illustrates a variation of Greenspun's 10th rule: Any sufficiently complicated Java program without a framework contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of one-tenth of Spring.

Re: Java is still worth learning

#18

The content of this post makes some sense, however it does look like it’s written by AI and thus lacks depth, context and personal touch.

I hate that I have to second-guess whether or not something has really been written by a human nowadays. Especially with these blogs that have sprung up in the past couple years.

Re: Java is still worth learning

#19

If Java can be compiled into a single binary and have a package manager then I would learn it. I really want to like Java, or JVM-based languages specifically, but its extremely annoying and complicated to figure out how and why thing works.

I think you might need to look into java (or better kotlin) then. Is gradle not a package manager on top of a build system, just like npm? Is a fatjar/shadowjar not a "single binary"?

Re: Java is still worth learning

#20
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spring and Quarkus are not Java EE.

Yeah, they are "jakarta EE" now. Or what do you mean?

Spring is neither Java EE or Jakarta EE. It can integrate with those frameworks, but it's a completely independent system.
Post reply on HN