hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tony Poppleton <tony.popple...@wanadoo.fr>
Subject Re: Code formatting and standards
Date Sat, 16 Jan 2010 20:33:06 GMT
Hi,

Thanks for the feedback, I have updated the page with your suggestions.

Tony

> Message du 16/01/10 17:57
> De : "sebb" 
> A : "HttpComponents Project" 
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: Code formatting and standards
> 
> 
> On 16/01/2010, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
> > Tony Poppleton wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Sebb,
> > >
> > > As requested, I have produced a first stab at some coding conventions at
> > http://wiki.apache.org/HttpComponents/CodingConventions
> > >
> > > Please feel free to modify as you see fit. There is still some work to be
> > done, most notably for me adding the Eclipse code formatting (if there is no
> > objection then I will add the ones Oleg sent earlier, until the appropriate
> > body comes up with the official one)
> > >
> > > On your point about being consistent in a file being more important than
> > across the project, I would disagree. If these conventions (and the code
> > formatter) become the official project standards, then they are exactly
> > that, and all files in the project should adhere to them by definition.
> > After the single SVN commit to clean up all the code, then both file and
> > project consistency will be maintained forevermore.
> 
> My point was about applying patches to existing code, which might not
> yet have been homogenised.
> 
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
> >
> > (1) I think it would be worth dividing content of the document into two
> > distinct sections: requirements and recommendations. A failure to comply
> > with the requirements may lead to the rejection of a patch.
> 
> I'd prefer to see the items flagged with MUST and SHOULD; makes it
> easier to keep related items together (and easier to change the
> priority!) IIRC this is the way RFCs do it.
> 
> > (2) Can we tone down this particular line a little ;-) "Prefer unchecked
> > exceptions (like RuntimeException) over checked exceptions". I personally
> > would be much more content with something like "checked exceptions should
> > represent potentially recoverable exceptions; runtime exceptions should
> > represent non-recoverable errors / unexpected errors / programming errors"
> > or some such.
> 
> +1
> 
> > Oleg
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.
> 
> 
> 

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