On Jan 21, 2015, at 7:42 PM, John Rose <john.r.r...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2015, at 3:01 AM, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> I updated the webrev in place to be more consistent in the use of braces and >> better consistency for the primitive specializations: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8050820-Optional-stream/webrev/ >> >> I don't wanna make any more syntax-related changes unless i done something >> silly. > > It's often a good idea to make cleanups to code you touch, but there is a > natural limit. > > If cleanups proliferate far away from the semantic changes, the two sorts of > changes will begin to confuse each other, both during review and later on > during backports or other change analysis. > Yes, it's very tempting to make the source conform to one's own "cultural of code format" (and it's all to easy to hit the reformat hot key in the IDE) [*]. > I think what you have done is acceptable from that viewpoint, since the > changes can be separated "by eye" easily enough. > > You can count me as a Reviewer for this. > Thanks. I updated the webrev to add "@since 1.9" to the docs. Paul. [*] I would be quite happy with a Java endorsed "culture of code format" and just configure the IDE to format to that (one less thing to think about). I am rather skeptical that any consensus driven approach can produce such a format before the heat death of the universe. Someone with trusted taste and leadership needs to make a proposal, one is allowed to comment during a period of time, but one is not allowed to comment on other people's comments :-)
