I think arguing about formatting and code style is opening a huge can
of worms. I think Eclipse formatting preferences strike a nice
balance, although even that can be contentious and lead to a lengthy
discussion of wether a "\n" is needed before "{" or not ;-)
For instance I'd code Kevin's example like this:
return (whatever) ? something : anotherthing;
But this doesn't mean that we need to follow one or the other style
religiously. I don't care, as long as the code works. I am neutral in
regards to the checkstyle addition to the build script. I am just
afraid that we'll get bogged down in the discussion of what the right
style is and never accomplish anything of value.
Andrus
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:16 PM, Cris Daniluk wrote:
> Apache has some style guides, I think.... I recall not liking them
> much, though :)
>
> Are we bound to them? Obviously this is low priority stuff, but now
> that we have a lot more people actively participating, it does make
> sense to at least have going forward standards, kinda like what I'm
> working on for docs.
>
> On 3/2/06, Kevin Menard <kmenar..ervprise.com> wrote:
>> I guess that would require us to standardize a coding style. I
>> know we
>> have the eclipse prefs, but I think Checkstyle gives you a lot more
>> control.
>>
>> So, while I'm not ready to write all of these out, I was wondering
>> what
>> the concensus on something like the following is:
>>
>> public Thing blah()
>> {
>> if (whatever)
>> {
>> return something;
>> }
>> else
>> {
>> return anotherthing;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> I personally feel the else should be removed. But, that's because I
>> normally get fooled by such things. In my mind, it's easier to
>> consider
>> whatever to be a special case and thus it goes in the if() while
>> the else
>> body is the regular case (and there's no need to assert it). I'm
>> asking
>> because there's a lot of cases similar to this in the code. If
>> others
>> agree with me, I'll go through and clean it up. Otherwise, I can
>> cope
>> with the existing style.
>>
>> --
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:45:10 -0500, Cris Daniluk
>> <cris.danilu..mail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> One thing that may be helpful is to setup PMD and Checkstyle... both
>>> require extensive configuration to eliminate annoying false
>>> positives,
>>> but when tuned, they usually present helpful information.
>>> Obviously no
>>> tool is perfect, but for us, about 25% of the reported PMD issues
>>> deserved attention, and 75% of the checkstyle issues did.
>>>
>>> Maybe Findbugs would be a better choice than PMD... either way, I've
>>> used PMD more for analytics, and checkstyle more for pure
>>> style/formatting myself.
>>>
>>> Ideas?
>>>
>>> Cris
>>
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Mar 03 2006 - 02:18:09 EST