- cross-posted to:
- fediverse@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- fediverse@lemmy.ml
Seems like an interesting effort. A developer is building an alternative Java-based backend to Lemmy’s Rust-based one, with the goal of building in a handful of different features. The dev is looking at using this compatibility to migrate their instance over to the new platform, while allowing the community to use their apps of choice.
Why Java though ? Like really ? It’s… Better than any other compiled language ?
It’s probably got the best library/tooling ecosystem of any language out there. Certainly dwarfs Rust in that regard. Easier to find devs. Reasonably efficient thou not as much as Rust and typically less memory efficient. It’s a perfectly good suggestion for a project like Lemmy. I’d reach for Java or Go before Rust for a project like this but you know, that’s just me.
You see, Go would’ve been a better option than Java.
Probably because everyone knows it and its more predictable
Predictable in what sense?
If you say the function should only recieve one argument and returns always boolean. It is predictable to only allow the wanted args and forces you to return a boolean.
For example in a less predictable programming language e.g. Python: I can do all above but python does not stop anyone to put more or less arguments to a function, or a developer not adding typehints or not complying to them and return a string instead of a boolean.
But i had it wrong rust is similar to java on that part.
But still it is a lot more popular and easier to start with. So there will be a lot more contributor to sublinks than lemmy ever had.
Well in that sense Rust is even more predictable than Java. In Java you can always get back exception that bubbled up the stack. Rust function would in that case return Result that you need to handle somehow before getting the value.
That i dont understand? How can it be a result that i need to handle? If its not correct than java will throw an error. ( As expected, shit in shit out )
It’s a great and probably the best error system I’ve seen, instead of just throwing errors and having bulky try catch statements and such there’s just a result type.
Say you have a function that returns a boolean in which something could error, the function would return a Result<bool, Error> and that’s it. Calling the function you can choose to do anything you want with that possible Error, including ignoring it or logging or anything you could want.
It’s extremely simple.
If I except a boolean, there is an error and get a Result, is Result an object? How do I know if I get a bool or error?
You always get a Result. On that result you can call
result.unwrap()(give me the bool or crash) orresult.unwrap_or_default()(give me bool orfalseif there was error) or any other way you can think of. The point is that Rust won’t let you get value out of that Result until you somehow didn’t handle possible failure. If function does not return Result and returns just value directly, you (as a function caller) are guaranteed to always get a value, you can rely on there not being a failure that the function didn’t handle internally.Because modern Java is an OK language with a great ecosystem to quickly build web backends. And there are lots of java devs which means more potential contributors.
Hello world in Java = 500 lines of code.
Hello world in Rust = 3 lines of code.
Java is over-engineered corporate bullshit used by banks and Android development. Nobody programs Java for the fun of it.
Hello World is < 10 lines in Java. Just say you don’t know the language and go away.
Java runs the majority of corporate software out there, and it is very good at what it’s built for.
I’ll take Java over Python/Rust any day of the week
Exactly. It’s also using Spring Boot, Hibernate, and Lombok. It looks just like projects at work. It might be the first fediverse project I contribute regularly to.
Ah, yes. How about he kitchen sink and another 5000 dependencies to make Java bareable to code in? Actually lets skip Java cos it’s an over-engineered cluster-fuck that considers verbosity a virtue.