flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Iwo Banaƛ <banas....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Flex SDK code conventions
Date Thu, 05 Jan 2012 09:34:36 GMT
Whatever formatting tool we use we should always make sure to separate
reformatting from actual code change. It's a nightmare to review a 3 line
bugfix when the patch contains 300 lines with formatting changes.

When we agree on the codding standards and Adobe commits the code it would
be worth to unify the formatting of whole code tree. That way it shouldn't
be necessary to add any reformatting to subsequent commits.

Cheers,
Iwo Banas
 On Jan 5, 2012 9:21 AM, "Roland Zwaga" <roland@stackandheap.com> wrote:

> I've worked on a project where IntelliJ and Flashbuilder with FlexFormatter
> was used, it took a bit of tweaking
> but both IntelliJ's formatter and FlexFormatter can be configured to
> process files equally.
> So config files for both IDE's can be created and distributed. Other IDE's
> we'll need to look into of course.
>
> On 5 January 2012 08:33, Omar Gonzalez <omarg.developer@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm with the rest of the people that hold this as really important to
> them.
> > It makes it easier to read. I understand that we are not all going to
> come
> > to an agreement on 100% of the formatting, but that's what teams do, they
> > come to a compromise and they all buy in and comply for the sake of the
> > team. I think a solution like FlexFormatter is great, and we should look
> to
> > try and find solutions like it for other IDEs like IntelliJ and require
> > that the settings files we come up with are used. Most of these tools
> allow
> > you to automatically format code as you save, I've used FlexFormatter
> like
> > that for a long time with our teams and it is great. It'll go a long way
> > toward reading comfort.
> >
> > -omar
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Go for it.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 1/4/12 2:13 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <mike@teotigraphix.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is likely not an option due to lexical errors, a lot of
> > > > formatters out there aren't perfect since they parse and re-emit
> code.
> > > >
> > > > If there was a formatter that was written that hooked into the flex
> > > > compiler's AST, that is another animal.
> > > >
> > > > I would love to work on that. :)
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Quoting Rogelio Castillo Aqueveque <rogelio@rogeliocastillo.com>:
> > > >
> > > >> maybe a pre-commit hook into svn client that run the formatter just
> > > >> before the commit happens would work.
> > > >>
> > > >> ---
> > > >> Rogelio Castillo Aqueveque
> > > >> rogelio@rogeliocastillo.com
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On 4/01/2012, at 6:57 PM, Michael Schmalle wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> This is kind of what I was getting at.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The problem with the Flex Formatter is it's an Eclipse plugin
that
> > > >>> last time I looked. The dev might have abstracted it but I don't
> > > >>> know.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The problem is Flash Builder is not the only ide in town.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Mike
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Quoting Douglas Arthur <darthur@vmware.com>:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> I for one vote that we suggest developers to use FlexFormatter
and
> > > >>>> publish a settings file for public consumption. I believe
Adobe
> > > >>>> uses it in-house, please someone correct me if I'm wrong?
And I
> > > >>>> even believe there's a settings file floating around from
Adobe.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > >
> >
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/flexformatter/index.php?title=Prefere
> > > >>>> nces
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> - Doug
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > > >>>> From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:mike@teotigraphix.com]
> > > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 2:48 PM
> > > >>>> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > >>>> Subject: Flex SDK code conventions
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I hate this topic but it needs to be asked to the community.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Since I am an initial committer I will stand by whatever the
> > > >>>> consensus is with the code I commit.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> But then the question, what are we doing about this?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> There is already ALOT of code in the sdk that uses different
> > > >>>> conventions. I think this is ridiculous because it slows down
> > > >>>> development switching from this format to that format (reading
and
> > > >>>> writing).
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I don't have an opinion on conventions, just proposing there
needs
> > > >>>> to be protocol with committers on this sooner than later.
And this
> > > >>>> protocol needs to be documented on a public page visible to
any
> > > >>>> one that has this same question creating patches.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Mike
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Alex Harui
> > > Flex SDK Team
> > > Adobe Systems, Inc.
> > > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Roland
>
> --
> Roland Zwaga
> Senior Consultant | Stack & Heap BVBA
>
> +32 (0)486 16 12 62 | roland@stackandheap.com |
> http://www.stackandheap.com
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message