beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Feit <richard.f...@bea.com>
Subject Re: checkstyle and code conventions
Date Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:54:28 GMT
Also:

   [2.2] adjust the list to README.txt (Jeremiah)
   [3.1.1] adjust to the current ASF header (Jeremiah)
   [4] explicitly defined indentation as 4 spaces (Jeremiah)
   [7.4] newline before else (Daryl)
   [7.9] newline before catch (Daryl)
   [10.5.1] Make an exception for && and || -- no parentheses required 
around their component expressions. (Rich)
   [10.5.2] Drop this requirement. (Daryl)

  
Eddie ONeil wrote:

>  Oh, yeah -- Wiki page here once we've come to general agreement:
>
>  http://wiki.apache.org/beehive/CodingConventions
>
>
>
>On 6/8/05, Eddie ONeil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>  Seems right to me.  Enumerating where we are right now:
>>
>>- follow Sun Java coding conventions except for:
>>
>>- line length of 100 or 120 characters
>>- allow use of "_" for naming class-level variables
>>- allow declaration before use of variables
>>- use "todo" instead of "fixme"
>>- nix the "I" naming convention
>>
>>What else?
>>
>>
>>
>>On 6/8/05, Richard Feit <richard.feit@bea.com> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I agree... we're amazingly close to agreement (compromise) here.  The
>>>only snag we've run into is the "I" prefix, and it sounds like we're OK
>>>with *not* mandating it at this point.  Beyond that, does anyone else
>>>object to any of the other mods we've made (or to the whole idea)?
>>>
>>>Daryl Olander wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I think we are pretty close to agreement, though we haven't heard from
>>>>a lot of people.  I think the biggest source of debate is code changes
>>>>(like renaming interfaces and variables).  This may be style, but
>>>>there are code changes in public APIs that would be required to match
>>>>this spec.
>>>>
>>>>On 6/8/05, Kyle Marvin <kylemarvin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>This whole thread is a good argument for why you should just use the
>>>>>standard Sun/Java conventions without mods...  I think you'll end up
>>>>>in a long debate over the mods where no one is ever satisfied.
>>>>>Coding conventions are just too much about style and thus, there is no
>>>>>"right" or "wrong" to ground the debate.
>>>>>
>>>>>On 6/8/05, Eddie ONeil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>The "I" naming convention is applied to only Java interfaces like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>public interface IFoo {...}
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's not meant to be used on abstract base classes -- which aren't
>>>>>>interfaces -- just an API.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's really meant to make very obvious in code what is and is not
an
>>>>>>interface without having to consult the Javadoc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>This seems somewhat dubious to me... when do I ever use a class or
>>>>>interface _without_ consulting the Javadoc to know what it does?   If
>>>>>I am a casual user (i.e not subclassing a class or implementing the
>>>>>interface, just interacting with an instance), I generally don't
>>>>>really care whether it is a class or interface.
>>>>>
>>>>>Also, you can't go back and "fix" existing interfaces, lest you create
>>>>>major back compat issues... so you are going to end up with
>>>>>inconsistency anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message