I'd be happy to consider it. There are a number of good technical and non-technical advantages:
* Strong, mature eco-system
* VM-based so we can easily change OS and/or other dev-ops related params.
* Large hiring pool with lots of experience in it (at least this is the case locally)
* More performant than Python, which would maybe be the next language that hits all three of these points.
Your counter-question also deflects and doesn't answer my original question: what problems can not be solved in Java without frameworks? What are examples of lego problems and duplo problems?
Maybe it's a misreading on my part, but I would interpret a "duplo" language as one I could not even build a framework in, due to a lack of low-level control.
You are answering a different question. Opting for Java is smart, albeit incredibly boring. Doing so is basically choosing to go with Spring Boot, at the same time.
You are going to do that because the Java programmers need it, Java needs it and if you don't, as another writer here said: you'll be writing all the frameworks yourself and at considerable cost.
So hating frameworks and picking Java is a dubious position.
You are basically just saying 'java frameworks are mandatory' and then when people are saying 'I've done java without frameworks' (I am also one of those. I'm not primarily a java programmer, but every time I've used java I have used it without frameworks), you're saying 'nu-uh'. You're not going to convince people out of their own experience this way.
Not really. "I did Java in a serious project without frameworks once" is not a counter to: Java needs frameworks to be generally useful.
I am not trying to convince anyone, I'm stating the case that Java and Java programmers need frameworks in a way that more modern programmming languages don't. And that this is why it looks the way it does. My theory thus explains reality.
Do you have a counter to my claim? As in: do you have many examples of companies now that use Java without having gone with Spring Boot (or basically invented it themselves?)
I did Java for a mindnumbing decade, for god's sake. Then I stayed around the JVM for another decade writing in Scala. But! This is not an argument from authority here, I'm merely trying to add some context here lest you think that I am a .NET warrior or simply hate Java from a C++ distance. I am not.
You forgot "To be generally useful". And as I've stated many times now in this thread: the proof lies in what job ads mention. They _never_ look for Java programmers without Spring Boot.
> If I can write useful software in a language without using frameworks, then said usage is not a non-negotiable requirement.
You are not Java. I can write useful software in Brainf*ck. This does not make BF generally useful. Enough, now.
Considering how many job ads for "entry level position" then go on to list a skillset that describes half an IT department, I'm not sure I would consider using these as a technical argument.
The root parent of this discussion pertains to the value of frameworks. In this context, I am making the claim that Java and Java programmers need frameworks and that hating them is basically misdirected. You are, in effect, blaming the plastic hammer for not working without first turning it into a metallic one.
You can agree with this or not but please direct your answers to the claim I am making and please be honest.
I'm frankly shocked that this is a controversial take and I can honestly say that this has made me understand why Java with Spring Boot as well as JavaScript is so prevalent still. You like it the way it is and probably always will!
I mean: judging by how most of you respond, you've probably also missed to point though so I can never be quite sure.
* Strong, mature eco-system
* VM-based so we can easily change OS and/or other dev-ops related params.
* Large hiring pool with lots of experience in it (at least this is the case locally)
* More performant than Python, which would maybe be the next language that hits all three of these points.
Your counter-question also deflects and doesn't answer my original question: what problems can not be solved in Java without frameworks? What are examples of lego problems and duplo problems?
Maybe it's a misreading on my part, but I would interpret a "duplo" language as one I could not even build a framework in, due to a lack of low-level control.