On 19/03/2010, at 11:05 AM, Adam Heath wrote:

> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> From: "Adam Heath" <[email protected]>
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>> Author: erwan
>>>> Date: Fri Mar 19 16:17:35 2010
>>>> New Revision: 925302
>>>> 
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=925302&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> Correcting warning message on too long foreign keys
>>>> 
>>>> Modified:
>>>> 
>>>> ofbiz/trunk/framework/entity/src/org/ofbiz/entity/model/ModelEntityChecker.java
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Modified:
>>>> ofbiz/trunk/framework/entity/src/org/ofbiz/entity/model/ModelEntityChecker.java
>>>> 
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/framework/entity/src/org/ofbiz/entity/model/ModelEntityChecker.java?rev=925302&r1=925301&r2=925302&view=diff
>>>> 
>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>> 
>>>> ---
>>>> ofbiz/trunk/framework/entity/src/org/ofbiz/entity/model/ModelEntityChecker.java
>>>> (original)
>>>> +++
>>>> ofbiz/trunk/framework/entity/src/org/ofbiz/entity/model/ModelEntityChecker.java
>>>> Fri Mar 19 16:17:35 2010
>>>> @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@ public class ModelEntityChecker {
>>>> 
>>>>                         // make sure all FK names are <= 18 characters
>>>>                         if (relation.getFkName().length() > 18) {
>>>> -                            warningList.add("[RelFKNameGT18] The
>>>> foregn key name (length:" + relation.getFkName().length()
>>>> +                            warningList.add("[RelFKNameGT18] The
>>>> foreign key named " + relation.getFkName()
>>>> +                                            + " (length:" +
>>>> relation.getFkName().length()
>>>>                                             + ") was greater than 18
>>>> characters in length for relation " + relation.getTitle() +
>>>> relation.getRelEntityName()
>>>>                                             + " of entity " +
>>>> entity.getEntityName() + ".");
>>>>                         }
>>> 
>>> Hmm.  What is the standard for overly long lines?  All on one, or
>>> wrapped?  The code base is not consistent in this manner.
>>> 
>>> My opinion, is that when wrapping, it enforces a maximum size, that in
>>> all likely hood is less than what we developers actually have
>>> available.  This would then mean that we have tons of useless blank
>>> space on the right side of our monitors, and that the code would end
>>> up taking up more vertical lines.  Which is also bad, because then we
>>> can't see the full method, when it gets large.
>> 
>> On this aspect If we strictly followed the Java Conventions would be 80
>> chars max
>> http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc3.html#382
>> I think it will be hard to get a consensus here. And even much, much
>> harder to change existing code
> 
> The big problem with a max 80 width, is that when you have lines that
> are indented quite a bit, you end up with the available content length
> being 60, or 40,  or 30, or something.  And that makes the code that
> much more harder to follow.

I hate trying to read wrapped lines, sometimes they improve readability like 
this:
UtilMisc.toMap(
    "item1", someLongMethodCall,
    "item2", someOtherLongMethodCall,
    "item3", yetAnotherLongMethodCall
);

but other than cases like that it usually makes things worse.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to