> I still don't understand what the hubub about unused imports is about. > Tapestry is pretty clean of them, but even if it wasn't, I > wouldn't say that > code quality suffered. I mean, there's some fractional difference in > compile speed I guess, and a tiny difference in code > comprehension that is > completely eclipsed by decent comments and JavaDoc. There > are other tools > out there that do a better job of analyzing the code itself for > deficiencies.
True! The reason I send these reports to the list is that: # it's easy - the report takes about 10 minutes to create # it occasionally triggers good discussions like the current one # it's fun to see all the projects side by side in any kind of view # it kind of lightens things up sometimes > > I'd much rather see folks working to create JUnit test suites > and publishing > their code coverage results. Tapestry uses a framework > called Clover, which > is free for open source projects and produces a pretty result (using > Velocity, btw). > > http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry/doc/clover/ > > I'm very proud of the 80% coverage (on 23K NCLOC, 23000 lines of code > excluding comments) and expect to push this to 90% before 2.4 GAs. > I totally concur that unit tests are far more important than unused imports, and I applaud your unit test coverage. 80% is awesome. Yours, Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
