On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 07:35:48AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > I've noticed two general styles of 'sorting' in Classpath sources. Both > styles separate the metadata types (all fields are listed, followed by > member classes, constructors, methods). Within those groupings, one style > sorts all methods alphabetically, and the other sorts methods according to > the order which they are listed in Sun's documentation (which tends to be, > but isn't always, by common functionality). There is also the question of > whether implementation-only members (private or default access) should be > mixed in with exposed members (protected or public), or whether they come > later. > > I don't have a general opinion - alphabetical sorting makes it easier to > find a method when just reading a file, but following Sun's sorting makes > it easier to compare a method to Sun's documentation of how it should > behave. Either choice is fine with me, especially since emacs has > wrap-around searching. But if Jalopy can make the decision easier, by > enforcing a sorting style, it might be worth considering.
Serializable classes have to have their fields in the same order as in in SUNs classes because of serialization issues. Michael _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
