I have implemented a few Java applications now, only desktop applications so far. I prefer to use immutable objects for passing the data around in the application instead of using objects with mutators (setters and getters), also called JavaBeans.
But in the Java world, it seems to be much more common to use JavaBeans, and I can't understand why I should use them instead. Personally the code looks better if it only deals with immutable objects instead of mutate the state all the time.
Immutable objects are also recommended in Item 15: Minimize mutability, Effective Java 2ed.
If I have an object Person implemented as a JavaBean it would look like:
public class Person {
private String name;
private Place birthPlace;
public Person() {}
public setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public setBirthPlace(Place birthPlace) {
this.birthPlace = birthPlace;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public Place getBirthPlace() {
return birthPlace;
}
}
And the same Person implemented as an immutable object:
public class Person {
private final String name;
private final Place birthPlace;
public Person(String name, Place birthPlace) {
this.name = name;
this.birthPlace = birthPlace;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public Place getBirthPlace() {
return birthPlace;
}
}
Or closer to an struct in C:
public class Person {
public final String name;
public final Place birthPlace;
public Person(String name, Place birthPlace) {
this.name = name;
this.birthPlace = birthPlace;
}
}
I could also have getters in the immutable object to hide the implementation details. But since I only use it as a struct I prefer to skip the "getters", and keep it simple.
Simply, I don't understand why it's better to use JavaBeans, or if I can and should keep going with my immutable POJOs?
Many of the Java libraries seem to have better support for JavaBeans, but maybe more support for immutable POJOs gets more popular over time?