Common Misconceptions About Java

Java is the most widely used language in the world ([citation needed]), and everyone has an opinion about it. Due to it being mainstream, it is usually mocked, and sometimes rightly so, but sometimes the criticism just doesn’t touch reality. I’ll try to explain my favorite 5 misconceptions about Java.

  1. Java is slow – that might have been true for Java 1.0, and initially may sounds logical, since java is not compiled to binary, but to bytecode, which is in turn interpreted. However, modern versions of the JVM are very, very optimized (JVM optimizations is a topic worth not just an article, but a whole book) and this is no longer remotely true. As noted here, Java is even on-par with C++ in some cases. And it is certainly not a good idea to make a joke about Java being slow if you are a Ruby or PHP developer.
  2. Java is too verbose – here we need to split the language from the SDK and from other libraries.
    • There is some verbosity in the JDK (e.g., which is: 1. easily overcome with de-facto standard libraries like guava 2. a good thing
    • As for language verbosity, the only reasonable point were anonymous classes. Which are no longer an issue in Java 8 with the the functional additions. Getters and setters, Foo foo = new Foo() instead of using val – that is (possibly) boilerplate, but it’s not verbose – it doesn’t add conceptual weight to the code. It doesn’t take more time to write, read or understand.
    • Other libraries – it is indeed pretty scary to see a class like AbstractCommonAsyncFacadeFactoryManagerImpl. But that has nothing to do with Java. It can be argued that sometimes these long names make sense, it can also be argued that they are as complex because the underlying abstraction is unnecessarily complicated, but either way, it is a design decision taken per-library, and nothing that the language or the SDK impose per-se. It is common to see overengineered stuff, but Java in no way pushes you in that direction – stuff can be done in a simple way with any language. You can certainly have AbstractCommonAsyncFacadeFactoryManagerImpl in Ruby, just there wasn’t a stupid architect that thought it’s a good idea and who uses Ruby. If “big, serious, heavy” companies were using Ruby, I bet we’d see the same.
  3. Enterprise Java frameworks are bloatware – that was certainly true back in 2002 when EJB 2 was in use (or “has been”, I’m too young to remember). And there are still some overengineered and bloated application servers that you don’t really need. The fact that people are using them is their own problem. You can have a perfectly nice, readable, easy to configure and deploy web application with a framework like Spring, Guice or even CDI; with a web framework like Spring-MVC, Play, Wicket, and even the latest JSF. Or even without any framework, if you feel like you don’t want to reuse the evolved-through-real-world-use frameworks. You can have an application using a message queue, a NoSQL and a SQL database, Amazon S3 file storage, and whatnot, without any accidental complexity. It’s true that people still like to overeingineer stuff, and add a couple of layers where they are not needed, but the fact that frameworks give you this ability doesn’t mean they make you do it. For example, here’s an application that crawls government documents, indexes them, and provides a UI for searching and subscribing. Sounds sort-of simple, and it is. It is written in Scala (in a very java way), but uses only java frameworks – spring, spring-mvc, lucene, jackson, guava. I guess you can start maintaining pretty fast, because it is straightforward.
  4. You can’t prototype quickly with Java – this is sort-of related to the previous point – it is assumed that working with Java is slow, and that’s why if you are a startup, or a weekend/hackathon project, you should use Ruby (with Rails), Python, Node JS or anything else that allows you to quickly prototype, to save & refresh, to painlessly iterate. Well, that is simply not true, and I don’t know even where it comes from. Maybe from the fact that big companies with heavy processes use Java, and so making a java app is taking more time. And Save-and-Refresh might look daunting to a beginner, but anyone who has programmed in Java (for the web) for a while, has to know a way to automate that (otherwise he’s a n00b, right?). I’ve summarized the possible approaches, and all of them are mostly OK. Another example here (which may be used as an example for the above point as well) – I made did this project for verifying secure password storage of websites within a weekend + 1 day to fix stuff in the evening. Including the security research. Spring-MVC, JSP templates, MongoDB. Again – quick and easy.
  5. You can do nothing in Java without an IDE – of course you can – you can use notepad++, vim, emacs. You will just lack refactoring, compile-on-save, call hierarchies. It would be just like programming in PHP or Python or javascript. The IDE vs Editor debate is a long one, but you can use Java without an IDE. It just doesn’t make sense to do so, because you get so much more from the IDE than from a text editor + command line tools.

You may argue that I’m able to write nice and simple java applications quickly because I have a lot of experience, I know precisely which tools to use (and which not) and that I’m of some rare breed of developers with common sense. And while I’ll be flattered by that, I am no different than the good Ruby developer or the Python guru you may be. It’s just that java is too widespread to have only good developers and tools.

if so many people were using other language, then probably the same amount of crappy code would’ve been generated. (And PHP is already way ahead even with less usage).

I’m the last person not to laugh on jokes about Java, and it certainly isn’t the silver bullet language, but I’d be happier if people had less misconceptions either because of anecdotal evidence, or due to previous bad experience a-la “I hate Java since my previous company where the project was very bloated”. Not only because I don’t like people being biased, but because you may start your next project with a language that will not work, just because you’ve heard “Java is bad”.

9 thoughts on “Common Misconceptions About Java”

  1. I am commenting only on the subtopic – the Java Language on JVM (as you can run Java on CLR via IKVM for example):
    Bytecode is not necessarily interpreted. Hot spots get compiled to machine code.
    Having a large chunk memory preallocated leads to very low cost of creating new objects – instead of malloc’s that have to search many segments (reality is trickier but as a first approximation – the statement is good enough)
    While C may be faster, assembler might be faster still – I do not see that many fans of directly writing assembly instead of C.
    Full code analysis leads to inlining and/or devirtualization of many many methods, something that is not available in C/C++ as their compilers only have the static source text and no run time analysis is possible.

    I like that Java gets hated, if no one hates it – no one uses it.

    BTW – it seems you are preaching to the choir, I doubt anyone hating Java will be convinced.

    The Haskellittes@Reddit are kind of cute, but let me not distract them from writing more libraries for Haskell, JavaScripters beat them with orders of magnitude.

  2. Nah, it is not Haskell that is the problem, it is the fans it attracts.

  3. **Java is too verbose**

    This is still true and probably will always be true. With lambda, some of the verbosity related to anon. class may have been eased, but other problems are overcome only with the help of patchwork 3rd party libraries(which itself could have further dependencies) — soon you have a cocktail of jar file dependencies even for something that is trivial in some other languages such as creating an immutable map or generating getters/setters/equals etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.