Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 12/12/2010 10:42 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
I'm not going to battle on this, but I would invite you to consider
the comparison to CXF. It's very large, and we've never had anyone
drive off in a huffman code because they hated the standardized
format. It's not 'heavenly', it's the fact that you always know what
you are looking at because the code base is uniform.
BTW: the comments about heavenly were not directed at the CXF
approach, but described experiences i had with programmers entering a
team, and the first they did was 'doing the rest a favor' by
reformatting the complete codebase.
I was also remembering the endless arguments, of which format was a
tiny bit better than the other. My approach is, focus, if it is not
relevant to solving the bug, stay away from it.
If you need to reformat in order to be able to fix the bug, do it.
The only technical barrier whe have is the line oriented nature of
generating deltas or diffs in the svn.
Gr. Sim
Kent Beck has a nice little book on refactoring to make code easier to
read and maintain.
I think it's important to understand the piece of code your playing
with, before altering functionality, sometimes refactoring is an
important part of the process if code's hard to read.
Code churn doesn't help much when tracking down a heisenbug ;) But I'm
more in favour of improving my debugging skills than restricting other
peoples efforts to maintain code, provided tests are run before committing.
Cheers,
Peter.
