directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot ...@marcelot.net>
Subject Re: Checkstyle questions: inline conditionals, protected fields, Javadoc for private members
Date Mon, 04 Oct 2010 08:20:15 GMT
Hi Stefan,

+1 on all three points.
100% agreed.

Regards,
Pierre-Arnaud

On 4 oct. 2010, at 10:11, Stefan Seelmann wrote:

> Hi dev,
> 
> we are trying to fix remaining checkstyle errors in shared [1] and
> have some questions:
> 
> 
> 1. Inline Conditionals
> We have 151 inline conditionals, should we get rid of them or should
> we allow them?
> 
> IMO 'simple' inline conditionals are ok:
>  return oid == null ? "" : oid;
> 
> Such constructs could be simplified
>  return ( ( byteArray[index] == car ) ? true : false );
> to
>  return byteArray[index] == car;
> 
> However nested inline conditionals are hard to read and should be avoided:
>  return ( val < 0 ? -1 : ( val > 0 ? 1 : val ) );
> 
> So what is our policy regarding inline conditionals? With checkstyle
> we can't configure that simple inline conditionals are allowed but
> more complex ones are not allowed. My opinion here is to find and
> eliminate the complex ones and then to allow inline conditionals.
> 
> 
> 2. Protected Fields
> We have 135 fields with 'protected' modifier. Checkstyle complains
> that instead the modifier should be private accessor methods should be
> used. The rationale is to enforce encapsulation. Should we configure
> checkstyle to allow protected and/or package modifiers?
> 
> 
> 3. Javadoc for Private Members
> Checkstyle complains about missing Javadoc of private fields. I think
> we should relax that rule and don't force Javadoc for private fields
> because IMO the variable name should be descriptive. Thoughts?
> 
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan
> 
> 
> [1] https://hudson.apache.org/hudson/view/Directory/job/dir-shared-metrics/


Mime
View raw message