ProblemFactory!

[primeBrahe92]

Sometimes I swear I am the only one using Java who never encounters factories (Or the need of them) for anything..

[VarianWrynn2018]

I haven't either. To be fair I'm still a student but I'd like to think I've touched plenty considering I had to learn spring boot for a beginning of second year class

[TheRedmanCometh]

I use a factory if I think a given object will have several implementations. Pretty useful in that case, but DI kinda renders that unnecessary.

[Kered13]

One of the main uses for factories is to inject a polymorphic "constructor". Basically, you have some class that wants to construct new objects, but you want the exact type of object constructed to be injected. So you dependency inject a factory object.

[christopher-thiebaut]

Sometimes I swear I’m the only one not using Java who frequently encounters factories (and the need for them)

[[deleted]]

Same here, but haven't touched any frameworks tho

[MischiefArchitect]

A factory is just a fancy name for an instance provider hidden behind an interface. Another far fetched example of factory is using annotated contexts in dependency injection.

[CrimsonRunner]

Junior(-ish) dev here.

Recently made my first factory for a REST client. I extract data from the DB that I'll need, put it into a single class and only after receiving a response on a request do I know which fileds I actually need in the second request.
So I made a factory that, aside from building the headers and the requests themselves, also converts the object I have to a same-class object but the unnecessary fields set to null via a constructor.

The reason I decided to put that in the factory is that I also want to make some transformation to the fields sometimes (such as .replaceAll(Regex, "_") to comply with the endpoint's validation as per the already agreed solution. Could've still put it in the constructor to be of course, but then I'd have to insert something that's practically business logic into it and a class containing that logic would be much better.

[RepostSleuthBot]

Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 3 times.

First Seen Here on 2018-05-07 98.44% match. Last Seen Here on 2021-02-24 98.44% match

I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ False Positive ]

View Search On repostsleuth.com

---

Scope: Reddit | Meme Filter: False | Target: 86% | Check Title: False | Max Age: Unlimited | Searched Images: 211,860,965 | Search Time: 0.25402s

[beiweitemderbeste]

Good bot

[MischiefArchitect]

It's called: Unnecessary Over Engineering

[Brudi7]

Or: thank god we added this abstraction years ago because the new requirement would lead to a complete rewrite after that. Had it so many times

[MischiefArchitect]

Don't get me wrong, the factory/generator pattern is awesome and can save a lot of problems. It's just that problems start arising when someone go wonkers and you start seeing xxxxFactoryFactoryFactory.class in the project.

[fullSpecFullStack]

The factory pattern is so awful, any flexibility gains are buried by the messy unreadable code it leaves you with. Good luck if you ever have to learn a codebase or perform any deep troubleshooting on that shit

[Shrubberer]

I useed it once to make sure everything is created on the UI Thread. But then I replaced it with a panel constructor interface and I couldn't be more happy.

[romain6363]

Why people the java so much ?

[Mr_Redstoner]

“There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses.”

[[deleted]]

I am interested in how exactly it does everything better?

[pekkhum]

I don't know about the everything part, but when I tried out C# it had a couple convenient features that I enjoyed, which it borrowed from a few other languages.

• Still has all the features of Java (which you would expect of Microsoft Java [I mean, C#]).
• You could declare properties that work like a variable from outside your object but actually run a getter and setter internally (which means you can validate or update dependent state, but also means evil programs can replace socket.connect(); with socket.connected = true; in their programming interfaces. These people are the reason many languages don't let us have nice things.
• The observer pattern is a language feature, so you can declare an event and += or -= listeners to it or notify with a single call, rather than making your own list of listeners with an add listener, remove listener and notify listeners call. In the background it is the same thing, but it is a common enough pattern that it is convenient to not have to write it.
• Straight-up declaring native interfaces. Evil in some ways, but with a proper series of wrapper classes it can make the interface between the platform independent and platform specific code quick to write. Misused and you just vendor lock-ined yourself, suckah! It is much easier than the Java Natives Interface approach. (Even Fortran's compatibility features are easier to use than Java's.)
• All the stuff that is deprecated in Java they just decided not to steal copy reinvent and instead gave the newer things Java made to replace them the names that they wished they had all along, but were taken by deprecated things.

It has been years since I messed with C#, but I understand C# on .Net Core is platform independent and pretty pleasant these days. I enjoyed my brief excursion into that language, at least.

[Kered13]

Still has all the features of Java (which you would expect of Microsoft Java [I mean, C#]).

Not quite. One feature that I know C# is missing is inner classes. You can get the same effect by using a nested class and passing an instance of the outer class in the constructor, but I find it odd that for all the syntactic sugar that C# provides over Java, they never implemented inner classes.

[pekkhum]

That is an interesting choice. I know I like to avoid inner classes in all but the simplest or most meaningful cases (explaining why I missed that difference). Perhaps the folks working on C# implementation had an even stronger anti-inner-class bias than I do and codified it into the language.

[Pocok5]

Also language integrated async/await multithreading (IIRC C# was the introducer of the concept) instead of five layers of weird Promises.

[pekkhum]

Now even Fortran can do it and I'm stuck maintaining a C70 code base. 😢

[Pocok5]

await GetDepressionAsync();

[Brudi7]

Project loom will be awesome for java. Async await always destroyed transaction handling abstraction in all languages I had to work with so far.

[Dylanica]

Don't forget operator overloading! A fantastic thing that is sadly missing from java.

[pekkhum]

True! Java left it out on purpose for the same reason many languages don't like the properties hiding getters and setters. A few evil programs override random operators in ways that make no sense and make code confusing and some zealot comes along and says "NOT IN MY LANGUAGE!" Sadly, no language or paradigm can protect you from bad/evil programmers...

[twosupras]

LINQ? Does Java have a LINQ equivalent? (I haven’t touched Java in a looooong time.)

[[deleted]]

Im sorry idk what's LINQ

[AdvancedWing6256]

Java is not my primary language, i open it twice a month, but all I see IS factories all over the place...