Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

jodd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 239 posts

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#101

Post by EdwardDiego »

hocuspocus wrote: post #6

I haven't really touched Java in a while but I don't get why you'd want a lightweight DI container . You can just build your object graph and pass dependencies manually if you want a lightweight approach, no? That's just the way people do it in most languages.

I want lightweight, and compile time. But I'll take compile time only if need be.

In terms of lightweight, I have never needed to use the @Alternative binding [0]. Nearly all of my needs are met by being able to define "this is a singleton, this is a dependency that you should always inject a new instance of, and this is a property."

But it's surprisingly hard to find DI that limits itself like that. The DI in Micronaut and Quarkus are probably the closest to my ideal. Compile time, and only implement a subset of CDI etc.

[0]: https://netbeans.apache.org/kb/docs/javaee/cdi-validate.html

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#102

Post by heurisko »

geodel wrote: post #29
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #23

I remember the days, when the Spring framework was advertised as a lightweight alternative to Enterprise java beans (ejb); now Spring outgrew the pretence of being lightweight, don't know when that happened. A year and a half ago, i got back to work with java and spring boot, and i was overwhelmed by the prevalence of annotations in spring boot. To cope with all this, i wrote this little project: https://github.com/M…

Indeed. I have a dozen or so microservices supported by team. Most are SpringBoot a couple of them I wrote myself with plain java and embedded tomcat. Needless to say Springboot stuff is rather complicated for such a simple business functionality. Errors are indecipherable being swamped by thousand line framework exception trace. But being an "enterprise standard" framework all projects must be move to this turd of a…

> Errors are indecipherable being swamped by thousand line framework exception trace

Don't you just look at the top lines?

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#103

Post by heurisko »

lmm wrote: post #57
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #23

I remember the days, when the Spring framework was advertised as a lightweight alternative to Enterprise java beans (ejb); now Spring outgrew the pretence of being lightweight, don't know when that happened. A year and a half ago, i got back to work with java and spring boot, and i was overwhelmed by the prevalence of annotations in spring boot. To cope with all this, i wrote this little project: https://github.com/M…

Spring Boot is not the same thing as Spring, and is indeed recapitulating all of the mistakes of EJB (I guess it's been long enough that the new generation of developers doesn't know about the problems). You can still use vanilla Spring though.

> Spring Boot is not the same thing as Spring

Spring Boot is an opinionated way to configure Spring applications.

> recapitulating all of the mistakes of EJB

Which mistakes is it repeating?

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#104

Post by EdwardDiego »

WatchDog wrote: post #15
hocuspocus wrote: post #6

I haven't really touched Java in a while but I don't get why you'd want a lightweight DI container . You can just build your object graph and pass dependencies manually if you want a lightweight approach, no? That's just the way people do it in most languages.

I think there are a lot of Java developers, that have just never worked without a DI framework, and just don't have a grasp on just how simple it can be to write code without one.

You say that, and I usually agree, I mean, constructor args are the simplest form of DI.

But then, working in a complex codebase, I introduce a new dependency that is instantiated early in the tree, used two disparate classes rather deep in the tree, suddenly I'm changing 10 different constructors just to get the new dependency where it needs to be.

The tree of constructors is where DI shines as an alternative.

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#105

Post by EdwardDiego »

WatchDog wrote: post #30
eximius wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who hated Java, used it for a few years, and now occasionally misses it... I only miss DI. I miss being able to say "this system depends on these external things" and having a consistent, convenient way of sharing/swapping/testing those components and dependencies. The solution in other languages? Unstructured globals, deep argument passing, or monkey patching with mocks?! Yea, I can write simpler code wit…

You can do DI without a framework. If you write classes with final fields, with a constrcutor that takes the class' dependencies,and don't use static fields to hold mutable data. You are doing DI. Just call `new` yourself, instead of having the framework do it for you.

Yep, but if you have to change 5 constructors to get a new dependency to where it needs to be, calling `new` yourself starts to suck.

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#106

Post by heurisko »

bedobi wrote: post #81
geodel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. I have a dozen or so microservices supported by team. Most are SpringBoot a couple of them I wrote myself with plain java and embedded tomcat. Needless to say Springboot stuff is rather complicated for such a simple business functionality. Errors are indecipherable being swamped by thousand line framework exception trace. But being an "enterprise standard" framework all projects must be move to this turd of a…

I'm in an enterprise and have successfully lobbied people to use anything other than Spring. Such organizations and teams while rare do exist so don't give up hope! (or just move to a more progressive org)

> I'm in an enterprise and have successfully lobbied people to use anything other than Spring.

I was in a team that used Spring Boot for a greenfield project. The documentation was great, there was tons of help of Stackoverflow (as it's Spring) and the consideration given to testing was first class. Deployment was also easy, as we just created a fat JAR. No application server necessary.

It was a great place to work.

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#107

Post by heurisko »

stickfigure wrote: post #49
WatchDog wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do DI without a framework. If you write classes with final fields, with a constrcutor that takes the class' dependencies,and don't use static fields to hold mutable data. You are doing DI. Just call `new` yourself, instead of having the framework do it for you.

When you have lots of things-that-create-things-that-create-things, this gets tedious really fast. DI frameworks exist because they result in a lot less code that does nothing but pass dependences along. This reminds me of SQL/ORM debate. "Just use SQL!" Sure, until you get tired of typing the same SQL over and over and realize you can cut out most of that crap by adding an ORM.

> Sure, until you get tired of typing the same SQL over and over and realize you can cut out most of that crap by adding an ORM.

And adding an ORM isn't either/or. You can still use native SQL when necessary.

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#108

Post by kaba0 »

geodel wrote: post #29
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #23

I remember the days, when the Spring framework was advertised as a lightweight alternative to Enterprise java beans (ejb); now Spring outgrew the pretence of being lightweight, don't know when that happened. A year and a half ago, i got back to work with java and spring boot, and i was overwhelmed by the prevalence of annotations in spring boot. To cope with all this, i wrote this little project: https://github.com/M…

Indeed. I have a dozen or so microservices supported by team. Most are SpringBoot a couple of them I wrote myself with plain java and embedded tomcat. Needless to say Springboot stuff is rather complicated for such a simple business functionality. Errors are indecipherable being swamped by thousand line framework exception trace. But being an "enterprise standard" framework all projects must be move to this turd of a…

And in 99% of cases that little microservice will suddenly need thread pooling, logging, some more advanced db management or God help some random messaging service and you are back to re-implementing the myriad features of spring in a shittier way.

It is not an accident that things like ruby on rails are popular. These are well-tested toolboxes with a solution for almost every conceivable problem. There are exceptions where it is not needed, but for business applications those are not numerous.

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#109

Post by kaba0 »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #40
geodel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. I have a dozen or so microservices supported by team. Most are SpringBoot a couple of them I wrote myself with plain java and embedded tomcat. Needless to say Springboot stuff is rather complicated for such a simple business functionality. Errors are indecipherable being swamped by thousand line framework exception trace. But being an "enterprise standard" framework all projects must be move to this turd of a…

Another big difficulty is the handling of depedencies, as spring boot is bringing in gprc, jpa, jdbc and countless other libraries. One really needs a dedicated team to figure out all these issues!

It brings in whatever you use. Also, it has a goddamn webpage where you can click together what do you want to use and it will create an initial project for you with the chosen build tool and what not. It hardly gets easier than that.

Re: Jodd – The Unbearable Lightness of Java

#110

Post by jicea »

wtetzner wrote: post #51
throwaway1492 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, it’s really exhausting to read this never ending wheel reinvention. Sure any one can use simpler non-spring frameworks, and other “non standard” frameworks and libraries for 1/10 or 1/100 of the functionality, and get 10-100x the bugs and much less or zero support. But we need netty! And then when you add thread pools, jdbc, logging, etc? Yep you’ve reimplemented spring. Just use spring, spend the time to learn…

As someone who dealt with a ton of Spring in the recent past, I completely disagree. First of all, thread pools are part of the standard library. Spring adds little to no value on top of it. Second, reinventing some of that stuff is absolutely worthwhile, because Spring's library design/implementation is not very good. Finally, when I had the opportunity to start a new Java project, I opted to not use Spring. I final…

Could you share your Spring/Spring Boot alternatives? Are they Java based? I'm doing backend stuff with Spring Boot and I would like to test alternatives. Spring boot is not that difficult to work with, but I would like to test a "simpler" solution.
Post reply on HN