The idea that I need to use an external build tool because my language provided build tools are inadequate is the argument. It should not be as hard to use Java as it was 10 years ago by virtue of it's own improvement. It was a sharp edge then, and remains unnecessarily sharp today.
I'd fear any language provided build tool would risk becoming, like the python standard library, the place where modules go to die. I think what we've seen in recent years (particularly with the example of node.js) is that it's best for a language core to remain as small as possible, offloading most functionality into external libraries which can have their own release cycles and development philosophies, and even be replaced if need be. With maven we even have a nice layering of this: maven's core is small and most of the functionality is in modules, which can be updated or replaced without having to rewrite everything.
If we bundled maven or maven-like functionality into the Java core it would slow down the release schedule and destroy the productively competitive build tool ecosystem we have at the moment. What is it you think we'd gain?
>'d fear any language provided build tool would risk becoming, like the python standard library, the place where modules go to die....
I used to think this, but Go changed my mind. Like Go or not, its an excellent example of awesome tooling.
Go run/build/install/vet/test make my life to much easier than it used to be in Java/C/++ world (and C# tool because I'm not enslaved to VS for my teams tooling).
Let me quote from a C++ post:
"We already "fixed" C++ largely by writing sane libraries, by having great compilers and IDEs, detecting issues with linters and so on."
This is how old languages work. You want a nice language? Switch! People get Scala working on Android, I hear.
