I don't have IDEA, so that may be the case with that
tool. Explicit imports do not cripple Eclipse
however. Autocomplete operates on any class in the
classpath, regardless of whether or not is has been
imported yet.
- Morgan
--- Alex Chaffee / Purple Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So I
My main complaint with explicit imports is that is
cripples a *very*
handy IDE feature (auto-complete).
I don't have IDEA, so that may be the case with that
tool. Explicit imports do not cripple Eclipse
however. Autocomplete operates on any class in the
classpath, regardless of
Craig -
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I'd like to understand
your position (and clarify mine).
The situation I was describing was as follows:
Project A uses Library X.jar (v1.0). Alphonse is a developer on
Project A.
Xavier is a developer on Project X. He updates Project X and
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Alex Chaffee / Purple Technology wrote:
But the Maven/Gump procedure is messing with that scenario a bit. Are
you saying that it promotes *automatic* updates of all clients when a
library is updated? In that world, Alphonse does not exist; he is
replaced by a script
OK, fine, it looks like the debate is raging already, so I'll chime in:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:19:45PM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
Biggest pain for me was discovering a large codebase with a lot of
unfamiliar package names that were all .* imported. Made it quite hard to
have a clue what
Subject: import * vs explicit debate
OK, fine, it looks like the debate is raging already, so I'll chime in:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:19:45PM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
Biggest pain for me was discovering a large codebase with a lot of
unfamiliar package names that were all .* imported. Made
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 4:39 PM
To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
Subject: RE: import * vs explicit debate
My 2 cents ;)
1. Implicit is best while in major development (for code completion).
2. Explicit is best (by far) when code is stable.
3. Imports should
Wow. I was impressed at all the things I'd said, before I realised the
second half weren't mine. Damn.
It's always fun when this debate comes up :) I think one of the biggest
problems is the IDE. They do not separate the model and the view.
For example, I should be able to say:
Show me the
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 04:45:17PM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote:
It's always fun when this debate comes up :) I think one of the biggest
problems is the IDE. They do not separate the model and the view.
For example, I should be able to say:
Show me the source in this style, but do not
not use the * notation from
http://jakarta.apache.org/cactus/participating/coding_conventions.html
Gary
-Original Message-
From: Alex Chaffee / Purple Technology [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 1:33 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: import * vs explicit
I apologize if anyone has already made this point, but...
If I'm writing code that uses a class called org.cavity.Thing...
import org.cavity.*
import org.apache.*
public class Test {
Thing t = new Thing();
}
But later on, if the class org.apache.Thing is created, the code will no
So I don't really mind if the vote goes the other way, but I thought
I'd respond, as nobody else seems to be starry-eyed...
My main complaint with explicit imports is that is cripples a *very*
handy IDE feature (auto-complete).
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 06:49:35PM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 06:52:26PM -0500, __matthewHawthorne wrote:
But later on, if the class org.apache.Thing is created, the code will no
longer compile, right?
Right.
Isn't this an untouchable reason for using explicit imports?
No; it's a reason for doing a full clean build and unit
No; it's a reason for doing a full clean build and unit test run
before checking in any changes.
This way whoever added org.apache.Thing, or updated the library that
added it, is responsible for not breaking everyone else's build.
In this case causing a compiler error is good; the error
...?
-Original Message-
From: Alex Chaffee / Purple Technology [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 4:41 PM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: import * vs explicit debate
So I don't really mind if the vote goes the other way, but I thought
I'd respond
]
Subject: Re: import * vs explicit debate
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 06:52:26PM -0500, __matthewHawthorne wrote:
But later on, if the class org.apache.Thing is created, the code will no
longer compile, right?
Right.
Isn't this an untouchable reason for using explicit imports?
No; it's
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, __matthewHawthorne wrote:
I apologize if anyone has already made this point, but...
If I'm writing code that uses a class called org.cavity.Thing...
import org.cavity.*
import org.apache.*
public class Test {
Thing t = new Thing();
}
But later on, if the
17 matches
Mail list logo
