Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of nbeyer@gmail.com designates
 209.85.216.193 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        b=vb9kTFEUQnQErfJug5YK9O/dR82vQ1aLAXJV6jGIfjLZ9udDxh9EuE9iyWOn8cRBv9
         w1Qo3qiT5GydwuNK2GEAmYBWvVNvzQir7GIJ+eT1nUL65bCsYkcq2s8S26cnvVER/udP
         ORe5LljNOnMxFW53lJlnxodSdbVCSY5w3GFg0=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: nbeyer@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <a43fbc6a0910261615h4abdd81en2b3e32d1f3f581dd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a43fbc6a0910261434w274ded20s14e3b3ed99331299@mail.gmail.com>
	 <200910270058.59096.gshimansky@apache.org>
	 <c3755b3a0910261503l3cb0118br548d49b61e9d61fd@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091026224454.B6090816048@nike.apache.org>
	 <a43fbc6a0910261615h4abdd81en2b3e32d1f3f581dd@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:29:27 -0500
Message-ID: <3b3f27c60910261829v3eae886ex308f704fb2d3cbe9@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Idiomatic Java: return-at-method-end in Harmony
From: Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Jesse Wilson <jessewilson@google.com> wrot=
e:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Mark Hindess
> <mark.hindess@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> Modern programmers do refactoring and testing. =C2=A0I'm more than happy=
 with
>> this. =C2=A0I want our code to be readable and using idiomatic style goe=
s a
>> long way to achieving that. =C2=A0Working is important but being maintai=
nable
>> is important too.
>>
>> +1 for making such changes but I'd prefer to see them as distinct
>> patches not part of broader changes so it is easier to verify that they
>> really are syntactic refactorings.
>>
>
> Sounds good. If I find myself cleaning up code en route to fixing it, I'l=
l
> try to make a habit of submitting the non-functional change as an
> intermediate step.
>

+1 for this approach. My opinion is that refactoring is fine as long
as there is a high amount of testing - the refactoring in most cases
should just make the code more efficient, simple or easier to read. I
do think refactoring should be separated from bug fixes and
enhancements when possible - it makes watching the changes easier.

-Nathan