DEV Community

loading...

Discussion on: Is JAMstack All Branding and Little Substance?

Collapse
nerdlyist profile image
Coury Ryan Richards

The funny thing is developer are people and people are simple. I'm a Java developer most of the time and we love entities, beans, dao, dtos and what not because they have a name.

Names actually directly corralate to adoption. So since the above mentioned objects had names everyone used them even in cases where it was not needed and a simple class could have been used. So to stop that an abbreviation, pojo, was spawned (plain old Java object). And then usage of basic Java classes went up.

Think about it. You can say JAMstack to someone and that automatically fills them in on a number of assumptions around the context. It's also easier to Google a name like that than 3 different ideas. People can write about the pros and cons and blah blah blah why mine is better than yours. Standards can be asserted around a name (cough cough agile).

Point being JAMstack while some might hate it. Since it's named they can talk about it. The more something is discussed like that the more of a thing it becomes.

So love it or hate it the name is doing, more the likely, what it was intended to do.

Just for reference here is pojo's wiki (chuckle at the first quote):

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_old_...

Collapse
thejoezack profile image
Joe Zack

You've summed up how I feel about the name, it's not great but it lets us have a conversation about the philosophy behind it without first spending a few hours agreeing upon terms.

See also, "serverless", "full-stack", "software engineer", "software architect", etc