Comment by rsynnott

Comment by rsynnott 3 days ago

2 replies

I feel this is overly harsh on Collections. You have to take into account just how awful that which it replaced was.

> Java Time: Much better than what came before, but I have barely had to use much of this API at all, so I’m not in a position to really judge how good this is.

Again, it is hard to overstate just _how_ bad the previous version is.

Though honestly I still just use joda time.

wpollock 3 days ago

>Again, it is hard to overstate just _how_ bad the previous version [of Java time] is.

The original Java Time classes were likely a last-minute addition to Java. They were obviously a direct copy of C language time.h. It feels as if the Java team had a conversation like this: "Darn, we ship Java 1.0 in a month but we forgot to include any time functions!" "Oh no! We must do something!" "I know, let's just port C time.h!"

MBCook 3 days ago

In my mind Java really got usable in 1.5 with collections and generics.

When you didn’t have collections everything was a complete pain. But after they were added you still had to cast everything back to whatever type it was supposed to be when you got stuff out of collections. Which was also a huge pain.

I know all the arguments about how genetics weren’t done “correctly“ in Java. I’ve run into the problems.But I’m so glad we have them.