Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 55385 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2005 22:38:43 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Apr 2005 22:38:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 93719 invoked by uid 500); 14 Apr 2005 22:38:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 93546 invoked by uid 500); 14 Apr 2005 22:38:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Derby Development" Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 93531 invoked by uid 99); 14 Apr 2005 22:38:41 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from brmea-mail-3.Sun.COM (HELO brmea-mail-3.sun.com) (192.18.98.34) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:38:40 -0700 Received: from phys-mpk-1 ([129.146.11.81]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j3EMcXjQ020245 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:38:38 -0600 (MDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mpk-mail1.sfbay.sun.com by mpk-mail1.sfbay.sun.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.24 (built Dec 19 2003)) id <0IEY00501JXGAM@mpk-mail1.sfbay.sun.com> (original mail from David.Vancouvering@Sun.COM) for derby-dev@db.apache.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:38:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sun.com (vpn-129-150-24-181.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.24.181]) by mpk-mail1.sfbay.sun.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.24 (built Dec 19 2003)) with ESMTP id <0IEY0050TK8A5O@mpk-mail1.sfbay.sun.com> for derby-dev@db.apache.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:38:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:38:36 -0700 From: David Van Couvering Subject: Re: Formatting patch In-reply-to: <425EED02.4010205@sbcglobal.net> To: Derby Development Message-id: <425EF0EC.5010600@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 References: <425EBC25.8030104@sun.com> <425EED02.4010205@sbcglobal.net> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I opened the files in vi and set tabstop to 4 and things do look a lot better. I will adjust NetBeans to this formatting. Do you want tabs for indentation, or spaces? I can't tell, but it sounds like you won't be committing this patch? I need to know so I can know whether to apply my logical changes to the files with the old formatting or the new formatting... Thanks, David Mike Matrigali wrote: > Unfortunately from the beginning there was no imposed standard on > the original cloudscape code. Predominantly most of the code is > 4 space indentation, with 8 space tabs. Unfortunately there are > some files that have been screwed up by IDE's. I like braces on > a new line, but would say there is a large percentage of code with > the other convention. Worst are files with both, changing code to > be consistent in one file seems reasonable to me. > > I just took a look at RunSuite.java and the indentation did not look > that off to me (line 91-93 looks off, but a quick look did not find > any other problems). (I use vim and others use emacs so we could provide > settings if necessary). > > The test suite code is one of the worst offenders and had been > scheduled for a complete rewrite, but just never got the work allocated. > It seemed better to contribute the tests in their existing state since > they worked, rather than wait to fix them up. > > David Van Couvering wrote: > > >>Hi. I am working on supporting tests with multiple databases, and have >>been working with org.apache.derbyTesing.harness.RunSuite and RunList. >> >>Both of these have some pretty "odd" formatting which has actually made >>it hard for me to read and understand the logic, so I ran "reformat" in >>NetBeans to get everything lined up. I tried to follow the standard >>formatting that I seem to be seeing in the Derby code, in particular >>braces on a new line, two spaces (no tabs) for indentation. Scanning >>the mailing list, I don't see any votes about a specific coding standard... >> >>I'd like to submit this as a separate patch so you don't get a huge >>number of diffs when I submit the patch that makes logical changes. >> >>