Mailing-List: contact dev-help@asterixdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@asterixdb.apache.org
Subject: Re: Function name and format change in the codebase
To: dev@asterixdb.apache.org
References: <CABytAGo_wo-fnBW5acdK0MPfJostA-kisTXqfV406BDvowhNNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <EA7D827F-18C4-4185-A9D5-35A6BFCA1CF6@apache.org>
From: Mike Carey <dtabass@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <21fad68e-79ab-3889-914e-d563ddccbdf0@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 10:23:29 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EA7D827F-18C4-4185-A9D5-35A6BFCA1CF6@apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------1EBE71004B255663E14D88ED"
archived-at: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 17:23:35 -0000

--------------1EBE71004B255663E14D88ED
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Agreed - yes to both.


On 10/14/16 6:36 PM, Till Westmann wrote:
> I think that the answer to both questions is "yes".
>
> My 2c,
> Till
>
> On 14 Oct 2016, at 18:04, Taewoo Kim wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I would like to talk about 1) Function name convention and Format change in
>> the codebase.
>>
>> 1) Function name
>> When we invent a new function name, would it be better if we avoid using
>> '-'(dash) in a new function name and use "_" instead to avoid two versions
>> for the same function in AQL and SQL++?
>>
>> 2) Format change in the codebase
>> When we modify a java source file, is it better to apply format changes to
>> the whole file or the lines that we only touch? For history perspective, I
>> think the latter is desirable.
>>
>> Best,
>> Taewoo


--------------1EBE71004B255663E14D88ED--