commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Hendriks <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1139126 - in /commons/proper/math/trunk/src: main/java/org/apache/commons/math/analysis/solvers/ site/xdoc/ test/java/org/apache/commons/math/analysis/ test/java/org/apache/commons/math/analysis/solvers/
Date Fri, 24 Jun 2011 07:09:46 GMT
I agree with you that braces should always be used. Personally, I do have 
one exception though, and that is if the statement following it is on the 
same line. That way, it is one line, instead of 3 lines, which makes it 
more readable. If the 'if' statement spans multiple lines, I always include 
braces, even if there is only one single statement involved. But that is 
just me...

I think the rule is already active in Checkstyle. I think I just chose to 
ignore it here.

In general (not just this Checkstyle rule), is it allowed to ignore 
checkstyle errors, if one believes that the code would be better if the 
rule is ignored for a specific instance; that is, in case of false positives?


Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi all,
> The provided patch for MATH-599 includes a number of no-brace if 
> statements like the following ones:
>> +                if (method == Method.ILLINOIS) f0 *= 0.5;
>> +                if (method == Method.PEGASUS) f0 *= f1 / (f1 + fx);
> I'm not sure if we have an unwritten rule for this, but personally I 
> dislike this style a lot. Checkstyle provides a NeedBraces rule to avoid 
> this.
> What about activating this rule ?
> Luc
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message