After attending to most of the qualms checkstyle had with the SCXML code base, the remaining cruft is posted here [ http://people.apache.org/~rahul/scxml/checkstyle-report.html ] *time sensitive URL*
The vast majority falls in three categories: 1) Missing header / line does not match expected header - Which my eyes style out of the checkstyle report ;-) 2) 'foo' hides a field - Inside side-effect free setters, where these reports come from, this does not bother me. 3) Method 'bar' not designed for extension - Outside the SCXML Java object model (where the type hierarchies imply certain semantics of execution for the state machine), I haven't chased these down. Thoughts, anyone? -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
