I think, therefore I blog

Java With No Design Patterns

By , 13 September 2015

Java With No Design Patterns
Java With No Design Patterns

What have I done?

I look down at the code I have just written. It's just one file with one static function and four unit tests. There are no factories, no singletons, no dependency injection, no local or remote interface, no containers, no special annotations, no xml configuration, no inheritence hierarchy, no fancy polymorphism, no abstraction, no black magic, no UML diagrams, no dependencies, no interfaces, no mocks and no side effects.

It's just code and tests.

    public class ProcessBeacon implements APILayer {

        public static boolean processBeacon(Long id, String email, String clientIP) {
           // code goes here
        public void processing_a_beacon_logs_an_action_in_the_database() {
          // test goes here

        public void processing_a_beacon_increments_the_open_count() {
          // test goes here

        public void processing_a_beacon_validates_the_recipients_email_address() {
          // test goes here

        public void processing_a_beacon_resets_the_recipients_bounce_count() {
          // test goes here

What has gotten into me? How dare I believe I can just write code like that? Without consideration for the greater scheme of object oriented nirvana. Without spending hours philosophising about which class in the universal hierarchy of things my function belongs to. Without considering how to perfectly name it, and how to access and instantiate it.

Shame on you. A beginner could have done what you just did.

Yes, a beginner could have done it and they would have been way ahead of us developers with over a decade of experience who have lost themselves in the storm of object-oriented design patterns.

I've always had this uncomfortable feeling that something was wrong with the way I code. A feeling that I don't know what I am creating. I visualise my applications as complex machine components interacting with each other in fascinating ways. I marvel at the intricacy of how they must be perfectly polished and oiled in order to mesh together. I picture the beauty of how the software agents seamlessly handle the docking of polymorphic components.

It's a fantastic image, but it fails to answer my nagging inquiry... what IS it?

Is it a machine? Is it a pattern? Is it a virtual life form? Or is it just a jumble of machine code?

In a way, my switch to a more basic, functional style of programming has answered my question. Object oriented systems do attempt to create a sort of virtual life form, but this is incongruent with the way computers actually work (and one of the reasons object-oriented design fails so badly at concurrency and multithreading).

Computers are Turing Machines which work by streaming long lists of operations which transform data held in the CPU registers. In other words, they simply perform *operations* on *data* and send the results to the user.

Now think about how functional programming works. With functional programming you basically chain operations which transform data provided as the input to the function. In other words, you simply perform *operations* on *data* and send the results to the user.

Are you starting to see a pattern?

Business applications are hugely dominated by operations on data, but unfortunately we've been so sucked into modeling we forget to write code that actually DOES STUFF. Instead we spend most of our time figuring out how to instantiate objects and arguing about it on the Internet.

So I've broken all the rules of object oriented design and am implementing all my operations as stateless static methods, one per file with accompanying test cases. I no longer waste my time modeling, I don't have to think about how to access the function (just CALL it!), I don't have to deliberate about where to put new functions and I can spend my somewhat limited brainpower on writing code that actually does something useful.

After all... models look great but they don't DO much.

Java With No Design Patterns

About Roger Keays

Java With No Design Patterns

Roger Keays is an artist, an engineer, and a student of life. Since he left Australia in 2009, he has been living as a digital nomad in over 40 different countries around the world. Roger is addicted to surfing. His other interests are music, psychology, languages, and finding good food. Click here to subscribe to his weekly blog, or stalk him on Facebook and Twitter.

Leave a Comment

Please visit https://RogerKeays.com/java-with-no-design-patterns to add your comments.

Comment posted by: Roger Keays, 9 months ago

@Moon, it's hard to tell if you're being sarcastic or not. OO programmers see overloading as a feature, FP programmers generally view it as a bug. By overloading I presume you mean inheritance. I think it boils down to a question of simplicity.

Comment posted by: Moons, 9 months ago

Yeah let's use static method so no overloading can be done!

Let's just do operations on data because who cares about abstraction levels?

Join Over 1000 Subscribers

I write every Sunday about travel, psychology, and technology. Thousands of people just like you have already subscribed—and for good reason. It'll change your life. And it's free :)

Read a Good Book

“A spellbinding true story of love, passion and adventure. One can’t help but be swept away by 100% Love Guaranteed.” —Dr Tammie Matson, author of Elephant Dance.

Chat For A While

Your Vote Matters

Which animal will take over when humans go extinct?