Who Needs Lombok Anyhow

Java is quite a verbose language and annotations can solve almost any problem. Right? - What a dangerous combination that is.

I understand it, totally. I’m lazy too. But other than saving all that boilerplate, have you considered the repercussions?

Magic is harmful

I don’t want any magic in my code. It is the thing that makes behaviour non-transparent. It makes you fire up your debugger, because you don’t actually understand what is going on behind the scenes. There should be no behind the scenes. Everything should be as explicit as possible, for economic reasons.

Magic is a feature with non-compositional semantics that succeeds in making the common case easy, at the cost of making the uncommon cases surprising, impossible, or ridiculously complex.

~ John A De Goes

@Data, @Getter and @Setter are a design smell

When i design the objects of my domain i want to avoid accessors. I want those objects to represent a set of behaviours on nicely encapsulated data. I’ll occasionally have some public fields on my Value Objects, but that’s about it. Why would i want getters or setters on these objects? They are a backdoor to the data that ought to be modified through specific methods. This smells like Feature Envy and Anemic Domain Model.

Also, setters work against my intention of making most of my objects immutable. After all, immutable objects are easier to refactor.

So where do i need accessors then? Maybe on my data transfer objects? Why would i want to go the length of making fields private and creating accessors on a structure that is solely data? Does this kind of information hiding provide any value? To me, it is just clutter. public final fields without accessors are a much cleaner solution here imho. And there i am, left without a need for accessors.

@AllArgsConstructor introduces connascence of position

This awful annotation couples the order of your fields to the order of its generated constructor arguments. So when you reorder your fields, you effectively break your code. That’s an awful connascence of position right there.

Bi-directional object relations cause stack overflows

So when you use Lomboks equals, hashCode or toString implementations, it is interresting that bi-directional associations will cause a stack overflow. I’m not saying bi-directional associations are desirable, or that those stack overflows aren’t obvious. All I am saying is, that if Lombok was just a little bit smarter, it could probably have avoided those.

The bad thing is not the stack overflow. It’s the fact that it is hidden behind an annotation.

The Lombok plugin will hit your cpu

If you don’t use the lombok plugin, lombok will cause you a lot of red code lines. If you do use the lombok plugin, it will hit your cpu quite hard. I know one project where it caused the autocomplete drop down to load 15 seconds in specific areas of the code. And this happened on an i7 processor with plenty of ram and an ssd.

Compatibility issues with Java versions greater than 8

When i tried migrating a java 1.8 project that used lombok to java 11, i ran into issues. And despite the known issues and fixes that i found on the internet, i was not able to get it to work again within 2 hours of trying. Delombok to the rescue.

update: seems like i ran into a similar issue like this, trying to upgrade to java 11.

If lombok is so bad, what are the alternatives?

We can just fall back to explicit pojo code. Some libs, ide features and plugins will help us out with the boilerplate.

equals and hashcode

For value objects, where you want all fields included, the apache commons lang EqualsBuilder and HashCodeBuilder come in handy.

public boolean equals(Object that) {
    return EqualsBuilder.reflectionEquals(this, that);
public int hashCode() {
    return HashCodeBuilder.reflectionHashCode(this);

maybe even use an intellij live template like this:

public boolean equals(Object that) {
    return org.apache.commons.lang3.builder.EqualsBuilder.reflectionEquals(this, that);

public int hashCode() {
    return org.apache.commons.lang3.builder.HashCodeBuilder.reflectionHashCode(this);


I recommend using an intellij live template again.

// just put in 'className()' for the $CLASS$ variable
private static final org.slf4j.Logger LOG = org.slf4j.LoggerFactory.getLogger($CLASS$.class);

Logger via live template


I really like the builder generation plugins that are freely available on the intellij plugin market.

Also, there is a new Replace Constructor with Builder refactoring available now. However, i prefer the Inner Builder plugin.

A case for Delombok

Thankfully, there is this nice little feature called delombok. It will transform all your former lombok annotations into the ugly boilerplate they created behind the scenes, so you can completely get rid of it. Don’t expect a beautiful outcome though, the generated code will contain a lot of @SuppressWarnings("all"). Also, the delombok feature of my intellij plugin caused my ide to freeze. So i had to use the Lombok Maven Plugin instead, it worked just fine.

to the comments

seamer: a refactoring tool for java

Just recently i was refactoring some very messy legacy java code and i stumbled upon this really long and complex method. I had to refactor it but there were no tests, no safety net, what so ever. It had so many different paths that adding unit tests would have been a tedious endeavour.

“Would be nice if had something like suture”, i thought. So i decided to just code it real quick.

Here is the result: https://github.com/gregorriegler/seamer.

Seamer is a refactoring tool for java that helps you get complex methods under test in order to make safe refactorings.

How does it work?

Basically you just wrap a complex method with a lambda and the seamer will then record all your invocations including input arguments and return values, serialize and persist them. You can later replay those invocations to make sure everything still works.

Seamer provides an api for you to make suggestions on the arguments you want to pass in. The tool will shuffle your suggestions and execute given arguments in all possible combinations. Or you can just let it run, click around in your application, and record real values.

When you are confident with the data you have recorded, go ahead and start your refactorings. Replay the seamer regularly to make sure everything still works.

If you have ideas for further improvements, feel free to do so, or just make a pull request.

to the comments

Between the lines

As coders we are constantly making decisions. This is what we do, it is our duty. Our decisions have a lot of impact. They affect the success of the project or product. They affect all stakes of the software, the users that are going to use it, and in enterprise even the company behind the employees that are going to use it. And of course they affect our own and/or our companies reputation. They affect what problems we face when we engage upcoming tasks, our co-workers future mood and even our own. Bad decisions can easily make us suffer.

What we do is not a routine, ever. We might have patterns, practices, principles and experience. Yet still, every new decision that we make has a unique context. This is why our work is very creative.

Sometimes we make good decisions and sometimes we make bad ones. This is true for all types of coders from juniors to masters. Sometimes we make bad decisions because we just don't know any better, due to a lack of programming-, technology- or domainknowledge. And sometimes we make bad decisions because we are being put under pressure.

Bad decisions are expensive and dangerous. They produce technical debt, and it is not uncommon that they lead us to even more bad decisions. Slowly but surely this burden becomes heavier. It cost us time, energy and money. In extreme cases it gets so expensive that it would be favorable to completely start over.

Willingly or not, because of the decisions we make, we coders are in great power. We are leaders, and we can easily steer towards failure. We are not just the ones to write lines. We are not just code monkeys. We are the ones who design the heart of the Software and bear great responsibility.

When everyone gets mad because of a problem, maybe a date or even a deadline, we coders are the ones to stay strong. We are the ones to keep calm, and disillusion the others. We know the code, so we know the truth. If we don't stand up, whoelse should?

It is hard to act professionally and responsible at any time, but it's mostly a good choice. Thankfully, code is very forgivingly in its nature. We can change it, thus allowing us to revert our decisions. We should value this changeability in the code. We should even take action to improve it. Maybe that'd be a good choice!?

I would like to end this post with a quote by @WoodyZuill:
Be the programmer you want to see in the world.

to the comments

Improve your Feedbackloop with Continuous Testing

Have you ever though about what the most valueable thing in software development was for you? And im not talking about things that value for you personally, but for the success of the development itself. Well i have thought about it, and for me it was Feedback - in any form. It is so important, because it enables steering. Development practices are made for the purpose of better feedback. TDD, Continuous Integration, Iterations, to name only a view. Many of the agile methods and XP are basically about better feedback.

It begins with customer interaction. I need as much feedback as possible, as frequent as possible. If i don't get feedback, i'm likely to get on the wrong track, resulting in a product that is not going to be used, because it's not what the customer needed. The more feedback i get, the better the outcome will be. If i get feedback rarely, i am unable to steer. I'm forced to make assumptions which are likely just obstacles. The quicker i get feedback, the faster i can deliver value to my customer. Feedback allows me to steer.

Feedback is as important for programming. I want it early and often. If i write hundreds of lines of code without running them, they will most likely result in a very long and painful debugging session, and a lot of changes. I don't want that, so i take baby steps. They make me go safer, faster and happier. There are two phases that define my programming feedback loop.
  1. The phase where i write code. Lets call it alpha, like so 'α'.
  2. The phase where i evaluate my code, and eventually fix errors. Lets call it beta, like so 'β'.
You could also see those phases as modes. It is important to understand here, that these phases have nothing todo with the alpha/beta definition of a software cycle. I just invented them to describe my programming feedbackloop.In the following graphics you'll notice that the lines get shorter and shorter by example which is intentional and should point out how i got faster using new strategies.
    When i first started coding, i did not write any tests. I wrote lots of code before i tried it out manually. Obviously it didn't work when i first ran it. I ended up in rather long α-phases, where i just wrote code, and also long β-phases, where i evaluated (got my feedback), and fixed it. Like this:

    I was very slow back then.

    I soon started with an interpreted language, which was very cool because i could run the scripts immediately. No need to compile or anything. Just write and run. It shortened my feedback loop, and i became faster overall:

    Sooner or later i eventually started tdd. And regardless of the language that i was using, interpreted or not, it again shortened my feedback loop and made me go faster. The loop was shortened to a single 'unit', which is obviously smaller than anything manually executable. It allowed me to evaluate small behaviours, long before the program was even runnable. It is important to understand, that the α-phase in the following graphic contains both writing tests and implementation. The β-phase is much shorter, since unittests run very fast.

    I thought this was just great, and it could not get any better. Wrong i was!! Later, i tried something that made me go like this:

    "What the ...?" You might ask. No, i did not break space-time. The thing i tried was Continuous Testing. Which basically means, that i do tdd, but i don't run my tests by pressing a button and then wait. I just have them run all the time in the background automatically... Everytime i change my code, my tests immediately run automatically, and show me "OK" or "NOT OK" on a small icon on my screen. Since the tests only take about a second to run, this feedback is instant. And since my IDE saves my files onchange automatically, i do not have to press ctrl+s or anything. I just code... and as i code my files get saved.... and as the files get saved my tests get run... fluently, immediately. This is HUGE. I am now progressing without disruption. I completely broke out of the phases, or if you want to call them 'modes'. I love it.

    I have used infinitest for this. It is a Continuous Testing plugin for Intellij/Eclipse. If you are doing javascript, i can also recommend grunt for Continuous Testing.

    to the comments