In my experience (sample size of hundreds of projects), Maven projects are <<by far>>, on average, easier to build and manage than most other languages. The repo structure is standardized, the build cycle is standardized, the built packages are always in the same place, etc.
The Java installation is a 1-time think. It's also a quick google away. I see this complaint a lot, I never understand it. It's plain and simple bikeshedding: someone complaining about a 1-time task that takes 5 minutes in total.
The rest of the stuff is IDE specific and I have no idea why you'd have to configure "getting the actual logs"?
Treating the IDE like a separate problem is not realistic with java.
With e.g. Rust, I can use vim, vscode, whatever floats your boat.
> no idea why you'd have to configure "getting the actual logs"?
Some genius java logging library, I can only guess.
With Rust you code in VIM because there's nothing better. Improving Rust IDE's has been one of the teams big focuses for years. Everyone codes in random text editors because there's no amazing IDE.
You don't need to constantly "extract method", move to class, generate all these mountains of classes by rightclick. This says a lot about the language.
But the main point is that with rust it actually just works: there is one way to set global toolchain and per project/dir. You're not required to also click through a million menus and dialogs and copypaste stuff and sync and rebuild and restart to get the editor barely working.
In Rust, macros generate code on build. In Java, Annotations Processors do. I don't see a big difference between these approaches, besides Java's mechanism being older and crustier. Rust macros generate tons of code.
> if you have rust-analyze you get inline errors, code completion, jump to definition, autoimport, autoformat...
Last time I checked, Rust analyzer was in alpha/beta. Java has all this and it's battle-tested. Including language server for VScode and other lightweight editors, and several options for build plugins that auto format.
> You don't need to constantly "extract method", move to class, generate all these mountains of classes by rightclick.
Lombok, or one of the popular Builder libraries, gets rid of all this boilerplate. I don't generate anything using IDE. In my experience, most Java user don't. There's many mature libraries for geting around class ceremony.
> there is one way to set global toolchain and per project/dir. You're not required to also click through a million menus and dialogs and copypaste stuff and sync and rebuild and restart to get the editor barely working.
You are right. Rusts build system is simpler and better integrated. But Java has amazing build tools, maybe the best out there. A properly configured maven project will compile, test, and run with one command. And it will import into your IDE with a simple "import project, yes"
I have worked on a ton of Java projects over the years and never had to deal with most of what your describe.
True, but with IntelliJ 99% of what you wrote is auto-configured.
Eclipse needs a bit of hand-holding, but almost everything you described is due to project configuration.
> Some genius java logging library, I can only guess.
That's your problem, you're assuming that Java is dumb and its libraries are dumb. They're not. I'm reasonably sure that <<all>> mainstream Java logging libraries log to console by default.
The previous engineer must have been a marvel of a developer to manage to screw even that up.
What I'd say is: Java, especially older enterprise code, had a ton of over-engineered patterns. These are slowly fading away, except for Spring, and even Spring's simpler these days. Java also tends to have some low quality and a ton of average but unmotivated working devs on Java projects. So yeah, there's that ecosystem problem.
But for example, if you'd start a new project and you approach Java with an open mind, it's one of the most powerful and flexible techs available. And it's much more modern than the stereotypes imply.
It is not, that's what I'm saying. And I don't understand why, if IntelliJ is the de-facto IDE. I'm sure that a fresh project is a one-click import, but an average project that isn't fresh anymore, always have similar IDE-setup-magic problems. At least in my experience over the years.
I know plenty of people who don't use a formal IDE. This "I don't use an IDE" is a stupid flex.
It's not a flex, simply a matter of preference: I find using the mouse too irritating, others prefer it because it's simpler.
But that's not my gripe, my gripe is that setting up IntelliJ, the one defacto standard IDE to actually work is some voodoo ritual of a dozen steps and restarts and so on.
However I'd expect Lombok users to outnumber Lombok devs 100k to 1 :-)
I frequently find that the particular constellation of build tooling and libraries particular projects have requires a particular version of the jvm and all the environment variables set up correctly. In some other languages there is widely used tooling to manage the install and use of the appropriate platform version for the project.
If you're working with a variety of projects, fiddling with the installed jvm and java_home and friends is not a one time thing.
It is. There's really no excuse for that. If it's been similar every time then you've worked on crap every time.
Building a java project should be (and is on projects I work on) as easy as installing a jvm and running either maven or gradle to build it. End of story.
"Install some lombok plugin" is only necessary if you want the IDE to understand lombok, IntelliJ will just pop up a box saying "Want this?" and you click "Yes". I don't see what's so onerous about that.
The rest you describe is really down to poor developers.
So "no offense", but shove it.
Yeah that’s a crap project. My experience was always that mvn install / ./gradlew run will just work. On all three OSs. And if I happen upon a decade old random jar file, and run java -jar something.jar, it will just work in the great majority of time. I think no other platform has it this smooth.
The project could have been set up instead with the "Maven wrapper"(1) which provides "mvn.cmd/sh" scripts at the top level of the project to fetch and run the proper Maven. So after cloning the project, all you have to do is set a proper JAVA_HOME if it's not already set, and then do "./mvn clean package" at the top of the project to do a complete build. The IDE's will then set themselves up properly if you import the project as a Maven project, and will sync with changes to the Maven pom.xml whenever it changes (Intellij does at least). That's really hard to beat.
(1) https://github.com/takari/maven-wrapper (Being integrated into Maven itself soon).
We occasionally do remote debugging at work. It’s just a matter of copy/pasting the correct JVM incantation into the IDE.
Even if your project is so messy, then you should be able to just to version a working setup (maybe needing to figure out how to make the correct JDK version be used across different machines) and after that it'd become a question of just having to check out the project from the version control system and click a green button in IntelliJ.
This most likely wouldn't solve all of your issues, but at least would help make onboarding slightly less painful and slow.
The run configuration can be automatically created by Intellij by attempting to execute a runnable class. You only need to set program args and env vars if needed - and that would be true for ANY language or program.
The spring loader path appears to be specific for this project.
The run logs are independent of Java. Thats just getting program logs.
There is no need to maven-sync and rebuild-project multiple times, unless you are explicitly refactoring the project module/build structure. Once you have imported a maven project, you can simply click build.
I know you will say, this is all fault of whoever made this crap project, or my fault for not fixing it. However this was my experience, and it has been similar every time in my life that I had to touch some java project (although this last one is the worst).