undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjmartrican3y ago0 comments

To your point, I started writing my POJOs without getters/setters. It felt like I was doing something wrong and the ghosts of senior devs I have worked with were looking down at me with shame.... "how could you".

The worst part is that some libraries use getters as convention. e.g. Jackson (by default) uses getter methods to decide what to serialize.

0 comments

mark_l_watson3y ago

I used to do the same thing, giving total visibility and access inside a package. I do this in my old “Java AI” book (you can get a free copy at https://leanpub.com/javaai by setting the price to free).

I had not touched Java in a long while until yesterday when I wanted to do a quick benchmark of Lucerne to compare it to a search library in another language. I was surprised how easy and quick it was to do this.

I have considered updating my old book for modern Java. It would probably only take a few days to update the examples, but updating the book text would take longer.

doctor_eval3y ago

Me too - I absolutely recommend using public member fields and not setters/getters! In 20 years of Java development I did not once benefit from all the extra fluff. Classic YAGNI.

I don’t recall having a problem with Jackson, maybe there is an option you can use? But it’s 5 years now since I used Java.

But my point of course was that this is idiomatic boilerplate you don’t find in other languages. Along with a bunch of other ceremony and nonsense like automatic dependency injection and reflection heavy frameworks that reduce mechanical effort by creating complex, invisible and abstract conceptual systems that require far more mental gymnastics than they save on typing. (I’m looking at you, JPA)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse