On Wednesday, Aug 13, 2003, at 14:57 Europe/London, Mark Mahieu wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also 1+ on consistant coding standards/conventions, regardless
what form they take. Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the
difference between automatically enforcing style and manually
refac
ssage-
From: Jason Dillon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
Kay, just checking ;-)
--jason
On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 08:34 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> No, no
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also 1+ on consistant coding standards/conventions, regardless what form
they take. Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the difference between
automatically enforcing style and manually refactoring a class to be in
conformance with the standard?
Depends on the e
On Wednesday 13 Aug 2003 14:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> No, not a single IDE. That's like ordering a single size of boots for an
> army. I was thinking along the lines of a Pretty Printer.
or using Checkstyle, and defining your checkstyle.xml upfront so everyone uses
the same style - and pre
nking along the lines of a Pretty Printer.
-Original Message-
From: Jason Dillon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
Single tool? Like a single IDE? Not gonna happen IMO.
--jason
O
lon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
Single tool? Like a single IDE? Not gonna happen IMO.
--jason
On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 08:28 PM,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I'm also 1
dardizing on a single tool resolve the sync problem?
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Mark Mahieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:13 AM
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: Suggested coding conv
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
The real can of worms is opened when developers start
reformatting code
with Pretty Printers or IDEs and then try to get their
patches applied;
everything is suddenly out of sync with what's in CVS. Even
automatically
n a single tool resolve
the sync problem?
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Mahieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:13 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
>
>
> The real can o
The real can of worms is opened when developers start reformatting code
with Pretty Printers or IDEs and then try to get their patches applied;
everything is suddenly out of sync with what's in CVS. Even
automatically enforcing the style as it gets checked in doesn't really
avoid that one.
I'
On Wednesday, Aug 13, 2003, at 13:54 Europe/London, James Strachan
wrote:
Agreed - your IDEA can sort the methods quite easily in outline view
without requiring this coding style.
FWIW the order I prefer is ...
However its gonna be hard to reach consensus on this + IDEs can create
these kinds
Agreed - your IDEA can sort the methods quite easily in n outline view
without requiring this coding style.
FWIW the order I prefer is
static variables
instance variables
static methods
constructors
public methods
protected methods
private methods
(along with static stuff first)
then looking at t
So once decided this is going to be applied in the CVS pretty printer?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 August 2003 13:48
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
One convention I've grown fond
I would rather see us order by functional group. If a public uses a
protected or private then I would expect to find that method near where
it is used.
IMO artificial grouping based on method name or accessibility is silly.
--jason
On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 07:40 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote
, 2003 8:44 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Suggested coding convention: sort methods
>
>
> Eclipse users shouldn't care that much, since the outline view can be
> sorted alphabetically anyway. :) I think it would be nice if
> there were
> *some* logic at lea
Eclipse users shouldn't care that much, since the outline view can be
sorted alphabetically anyway. :) I think it would be nice if there were
*some* logic at least to the code, but I don't know that I agree this is
the right approach to take - I quite like my accessor methods to be next
to each oth
16 matches
Mail list logo
