Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA4959B61 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2012 21:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 88181 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2012 21:35:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 88047 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2012 21:35:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 88038 invoked by uid 99); 6 Apr 2012 21:35:15 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:35:15 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of knst.kolinko@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.173 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.173] (HELO mail-yx0-f173.google.com) (209.85.213.173) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:35:08 +0000 Received: by yenr5 with SMTP id r5so1727256yen.18 for ; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:34:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4l6qRvJe0JujSQ5cLy8zLrRQFxNqADEbLKCsyPPDOjQ=; b=SL2vTzb1SdBgWyrgTMwIp+m8qbV4mwyHrD27dkB/85fqsRhpKkdPMbZwfNUxFg/O89 bwl67PcTJUrVs/QWRIYnur3YUQ2QAmHCvt8ImCKJ7aA9b2YgN9kY8T3sb+8UHYxuYOHK wz3QaGG7sKgNQg+edfg77SNZuDKRUNSIIaROGTXJgezAWm/wwqHFe2qR4XR8cipN6R5Q UEOdcMlLwYP7ErORqV4VsqDNZ+bWdDzo7l72mod1F7MRi/RAm1sh43vl+OqkM4Gwtkyh k56068xjsI5Ly9h1LFu61GDJKkhXUeUcz4emLzYlpRZMY7lUPv7DZbxcQGoeloHZT/78 fqhw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.193.41 with SMTP id j29mr8218979yhn.14.1333748087576; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.146.204.18 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Apr 2012 14:34:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4F7F605F.7090207@apache.org> References: <20120406184420.1941F23889EC@eris.apache.org> <4F7F605F.7090207@apache.org> Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 01:34:47 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r1310541 - in /tomcat/trunk/test/javax: el/TestCompositeELResolver.java servlet/jsp/TestPageContext.java From: Konstantin Kolinko To: Tomcat Developers List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2012/4/7 Mark Thomas : > On 06/04/2012 22:16, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >> 2012/4/6 =A0: >>> Author: markt >>> Date: Fri Apr =A06 18:44:19 2012 >>> New Revision: 1310541 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=3D1310541&view=3Drev >>> Log: >>> Don't use static imports >> >> ? >> >> 1. I would say that I'd prefer to use static imports in JUnit tests. >> They cause no confusion here and are easier to read >> >> (and using static imports for those assert methods is what is >> recommended in many places). > > Having seen other projects avoid them and then compared the two styles I > prefer not using them. In general I'd also prefer not to use them, but JUnit tests are a special exception where this usage is well-known. I think we already discussed this (and thus are our checkstyle rules). >> 2. It should be already allowed by configuration in checkstyle.xml, >> so was there a problem? > > No problem. Just a personal itch. > > I was going to work my way through the remainder if nobody complained > but I am happy to revert it if folks prefer the static imports. > > Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org