commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim O'Brien <>
Subject Re: [math] coding style
Date Tue, 20 May 2003 21:19:27 GMT
On Tue, 20 May 2003, robert burrell donkin wrote:

> On Tuesday, May 20, 2003, at 08:19 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> don't worry too much about checkstyle at the moment. 

I agree, there are important rules like not introducing tabs, but don't 
let strict adherence to checkstyle rules get in the way of progress.  
Maybe, a "good" checkstyle report should be a prerequisite for a release.  

Here's some proposed checkstyle rules.  This reduces the number of current 
violations to 415.  I think it is valuable to keep checks for missing 
javadocs, and size limitations on methods:


# commons math customization of default Checkstyle behavior

# Ignore operator wrap, this has the effect of allowing
# operators to appear at both the eol and the nl.  This
# setting should be eol, but checkstyle had problems 
# parsing this property when set to "eol".  "ignore"
# was selected as a fallback.
checkstyle.wrap.operator = ignore

# Ignore padding around parethese, this allows for both
# foo(a,b), and foo( a, b ).
checkstyle.paren.pad = ignore

# One should not be instantiating a java.lang.Boolean
checkstyle.illegal.instantiations = java.lang.Boolean


Tim O'Brien

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message