A lot of external Java framework is about inversion of control. It looks good on PowerPoint slides, but I think it's horrific to maintain (as well has hard to write). Inversion of control means you have no control, and the most common error case is "why didn't my code run?" But you can't use a debugger to tell you what didn't happen. Any breakpoints have to be set inside the framework code, which is open source but is not intended for your eyes.
Yep no magic...
Have you ever read Kubernetes source code?
Kubernetes is not a good example of idiomatic Go in any sense. Perhaps Spring Boot and friends are also not good examples of idiomatic Java, but they are absolutely the common case of what is found in the wild.
Kubernetes is a single (bad) Go project. Every piece of Java I ever see is AbstractFactoryProxyBean nonsense with annotations all over the show.
I don’t know of a Go project where I can’t start at main (for a given program) and work out how it works without a bunch of ecosystem context. I can’t think of a single Java program where I can.
You could equally say this of COBOL.
> They haven't yet looked back at code they wrote and said, "ugh, what the hell was I thinking?"
Ironically, "what they hell were they thinking" is exactly the reaction I have to even Greenfield code written using Spring Boot or any of the other annotation driven nonsense.
The idea that programs written in Java are more maintainable than programs written in (say) Go, where you can read what the program does end-to-end instead of having to guess at what garbage has been generated by Lombok or overridden by some random JAR on the class path is bizarre. Let's not even talk about Gradle.