The question was line length enforcement yes/no. Based on the result, please remove enforcement.
Thomas On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Chandni Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > Was any decision made here. > > From this email thread > 9 votes for recommendation > 5 votes for enforcement. > > Since more people are in favor of of having this as recommendation, shall I > go ahead make this change? > > Thanks, > Chandni > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:56 AM, York, Brennon <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > I view this in the same regards as a white line on where to stop at a > stop > > light. The federal govt. must say, in clear terms, ³this is where you > stop > > at a stop light, NO FARTHER² even though people go past the white line > all > > the time. The point is that, if necessary, it can be enforced with > > *exacting* guidelines. There is *no debate* on whether you can be after > > the line or not when stopped at a stop light, technically, according to > > the law. > > > > The point is we should set a clear and undisputed line. A recommendation > > will only cause confusion and debate. A clear stance, one way or the > > other, is, in my view, the only right way to move forward, even with a > > decision as seemingly minimal as code line length. > > > > All that said I¹m +1 for keeping 120 characters for all the below reasons > > listed thus far. > > > > On 12/2/15, 8:53 AM, "Vlad Rozov" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >It is highly subjective where wrapping increase or decrease readability > > >and where it is OK to skip reading code that does not appear on a screen > > >or does not fit editor window. Once it becomes recommendation, the limit > > >will not be enforced by an automated tool and we purely rely on pull > > >request reviewers/commiters to check for proper wrapping. IMO, reviewers > > >should focus more on code logic that can't be checked by a tool rather > > >than wasting time on whether or not wrapping follows recommendation and > > >the later can be delegated to the checkstyle. > > > > > >Thank you, > > > > > >Vlad > > > > > >On 12/2/15 08:15, Siyuan Hua wrote: > > >> +1 for recommendation > > >> > > >> Hard limit will make code look ugly and actually decrease the > > >>readability. > > >> For example, break method signature/for loop to multiple lines > > >> But chain method call is good to be broken into lines > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:01 AM, David Yan <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> +1 for recommendation over enforcement > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Munagala Ramanath < > [email protected] > > > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Recommendation good, enforcement bad. > > >>>> > > >>>> Code reviewers can also "strongly recommend" on a case-by-case > basis. > > >>>> > > >>>> Ram > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Sandeep Deshmukh < > > >>> [email protected]> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> +1 for having 120 length as a recommendation. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Regards, > > >>>>> Sandeep > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Shubham Pathak < > > >>> [email protected] > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> +1 for having 120 length as a recommendation . Enforcement would > > >>>>> compromise > > >>>>>> on readability. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Chandni Singh < > > >>>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I agree with Thomas. Having 120 length should be a recommendation > > >>> not > > >>>>> an > > >>>>>>> enforcement. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Chandni > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Priyanka Gugale < > > >>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> +1 to have fixed length. > > >>>>>>>> We need to check if there any way to help editors split the big > > >>>>> strings > > >>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>> better way. > > >>>>>>>> Or for such exceptions, coder can format the part manually, > > >>>> adhering > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> length restriction and giving better readability. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -Priyanka > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Pradeep A. Dalvi < > > >>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -1 for 120 hard stop. There should be guideline to follow 120 > > >>>> line > > >>>>>>>> length, > > >>>>>>>>> not an enforcement. > > >>>>>>>>> Few characters ahead of 120 limit shall be allowed, if > > >>> otherwise > > >>>>>>>>> compromises readability. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Timothy Farkas < > > >>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> +1 to keep 120 line length. In my opinion it improves > > >>>> readability > > >>>>>>>> because > > >>>>>>>>>> it allows you to read code by only scrolling up and down. If > > >>>> you > > >>>>>> mix > > >>>>>>>>> having > > >>>>>>>>>> to scroll up, down, left, and right into the mix it can > > >>> become > > >>>>>>>> difficult > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>> read code. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Vlad Rozov < > > >>>>>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> +1 to keep 120 hard stop enforcement and not to rely on IDE > > >>>>>>>> formatting > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> find wrapping point. I agree that wrapping string literal > > >>> not > > >>>>>>> always > > >>>>>>>>> help > > >>>>>>>>>>> with readability, but overall I think that enforcing a hard > > >>>>> stop > > >>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> line length help with writing better code especially after > > >>>>> going > > >>>>>>>>> through > > >>>>>>>>>> an > > >>>>>>>>>>> exercise of fixing all code style violations in the buffer > > >>>>>> server. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Additionally some string literals may span multiple lines > > >>> and > > >>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>> require > > >>>>>>>>>>> breaking anyway. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Vlad > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 12/1/15 21:19, Thomas Weise wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> A while ago, we discussed max length for line length > > >>>>> enforcement > > >>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> majority wanted to stop at 120 characters. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Since then Vlad has fixed code style violations for one of > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> modules: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-apex-core/pull/175 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Before we continue I would like to put the line length > > >>>>>> enforcement > > >>>>>>>>> back > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> poll. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I think it leads to undesirable results, such as breaking > > >>>>> string > > >>>>>>>>>> literals. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> There are also instances of questionable readability gains > > >>>> and > > >>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> breaks > > >>>>>>>>>>>> still have to be manually handled due to unwelcome IDE > > >>>>>>> auto-format. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> My preference would be not not enforce a line length. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Opinions please. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or > > proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used > > solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The > information > > transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or entity > > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the > intended > > recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, > > dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any > > action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you > > have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and > > delete the material from your computer. > > > > >
