Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by capableweb 962 days ago
> Whether it ships with it or not is, however, irrelevant

When talking about projects in the wild, sure. But if we're specifically talking about language features, then "something being a part of the language" is wildly different than "installable 3rd party library".
1 comments
neonsunset 962 days ago
This mentality is the exact cause behind both .NET and JVM worlds being worse at enjoying the OSS-first benefits of their ecosystems than Rust or, God forbid, Go where it is expected to import a widely known good packages for solving a particular task.

Sometimes, it is a scar tissue from dealing with NIH syndrome too - at least you can use the OOB tools for combating with it, but the NIH itself it the actual source of people being resistant to adopting proven and good solutions developed by community.

link
pjmlp 962 days ago
On the contrary, it means I can be sure wherever there is an implementation the features I depend on are available out of the box, and don't depend on someone during late nights to add support for the given platform.

It also means that I don't need to download the whole Internet for basic features.

link
javanonymous 961 days ago
I'm not sure if I understand your point, but I haven't seen any NIH at the places where I have worked. We have been encouraged to use popular stable libraries when possible.

Java has several 3rd party dependencies that are expected to just be there in projects where I have worked. Examples are Lombok, Apache Commons and SLF4J. These have become so widely used, that I have stopped thinking about them as external dependencies.

Guava used to be more popular too, but now that Java has Optional and Streams, I don't see it as often.

link