Re:Java Is Underhyped
by dragonwriter on Friday April 16, 2021 @05:36AM
(#26831669)
> Java also had the unfortunate destiny of becoming popular at the time where "OOP all the thing" was a mantra in tech circles.
Java was a product of “OOP all the things”, it wouldn’t have existed without it.
Java created that hype to market itself. OOP all the things probably wouldn't have been a thing without it, for instance.
It was very much a marketed language and a language designed to be sold to top heavy corporations. This fueled a lot of the crappy design decisions, the hype and the culture.
Re:Java Is Underhyped
by dragonwriter on Friday April 16, 2021 @05:41AM
(#26831708)
> Java created that hype to market itself. OOP all the things probably wouldn't have been a thing without it, for instance
“OOP all the things” predated (and led to) Java, it wasn’t a product of Java (C++, Objective-C, Object Pascal and, well, a bunch of other things from the late 1980s and early 1990s were where it got started.) Java was about a decade into it.
There's a big difference between "OOP is cool" (which Java didn't invent) and "OOP ALL of the things".
Re:Java Is Underhyped
by doctor_eval on Saturday April 17, 2021 @05:18AM
(#26842826)
But Java clearly didn’t “OOP all the things”, unlike earlier languages like Smalltalk. Java primitives are not objects (despite the fact that I often found myself wishing they were), and static methods are actually just functions. These days Java even supports first-class functions.
I know not everyone will agree with me, and that’s fine, but I always found Java to be far more pragmatic than, for example, C++, which well and truely predated Java.
Java also had the unfortunate destiny of becoming popular at the time where "OOP all the thing" was a mantra in tech circles. Also design pattern were all the rage.
Those things have a huge inertia, and while Java is not a much more flexible language, the image stuck, to the point that new comers still implement singletons in the wild.