"The refactoring capabilities of modern-day IDEs help immensely with
reducing the amount of work one has to do to make syntactic changes over
the whole codebase. So the argument that developers tend to over-engineer
when coding in Java to avoid any pains that may arise because of its
verbosity doesn't hold, IMO."
Refactoring tools might be nice and will help you here and there, but
there's a difference in the abstraction abilites of a language like Java
compared to language like Haskell.
It's not only about the amount of code, but also about the complexity of
the code, when building abstractions.
Yes, a refactoring tool might help you dealing with the complexity, but
it's still there and makes it more difficult.
I never understood the point of using a less capable language and then
using a tool to compensate it, e.g automatically generate code for it.
I never understood the point of using a less capable language and then using a tool to compensate it, e.g automatically generate code for it.
I definitely agree with you on this one :). Sure, it's better to use a language that lets you have less complexity even as your codebase grows quite large. You mentioned Haskell. Since I don't have any experience with it, what do you think is the reason that it's not used very often for building large enterprise applications (or maybe it is, and I just don't know about them)?
"Since I don't have any experience with it, what do you think is the
reason that it's not used very often for building large enterprise
applications (or maybe it is, and I just don't know about them)?"
Well, I don't know if it's even clear why other languages are used
for enterprise software?
I don't think that their technical or whatever superiority was the main
reason. Sometimes it seems that everything that is needed is to push it
with a lot of marketing into the mainstream and then just let it go.
At some point there're more libaries for a language, most people use that
language, universities are teaching it, so that's then the main reason to
use a language.
Java might been there, pushed into mainstream, at the right time, with the
right features, which made it less complex and less error prone (garbage
collection, no memory pointers) to use, compared to C/C++.
But perhaps there's something about "object orientation", how it's
implemented in Java, which makes it for people easier to grasp, if I read
all the hate about these strange scheme/lisp courses in universities, but
perhaps they're just already used to much to other languages.
On Haskell, at the beginning it looks very strange, especially compared to
languages like C/C++, Java or C#, but I think that most of the felt
strangness is a matter of habit, because most of the mainstream langugages
aren't that different.
I don't think that learning Haskell was that much harder for me than
learning to program in C++ or Java. Sometimes people seem to forget the
challenges they had, when they learned programming for the first time.
Refactoring tools might be nice and will help you here and there, but there's a difference in the abstraction abilites of a language like Java compared to language like Haskell.
It's not only about the amount of code, but also about the complexity of the code, when building abstractions.
Yes, a refactoring tool might help you dealing with the complexity, but it's still there and makes it more difficult.
I never understood the point of using a less capable language and then using a tool to compensate it, e.g automatically generate code for it.