Nice initiative.

I agree with the proposal above. (two comments though...)
1, final variable / parameters. I have no strong opinion about this one.
Usually I think less typing is good typing, but as I said...no strong
opinion here. (I know that Joshua Bloch's Effective Java advocates 100%
final variables...and maybe that should shut me up)
2, What I do have "strong" opinion about (as if you guys havent noticed ;) )
is the "lambda/anonymous function simulation" thingie...I think it really
makes sense. (or maybe we should call it "SAM conversion simulation", Brian
Goetz published this paper regarding SAM recently:
www.wiki.jvmlangsummit.com/images/1/1e/2011_Goetz_Lambda.pdf)

// Roger

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Johnathan Meehan <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Could we consolidate the discussion of coding standards in this thread?
> Shouldn't take too long, and it would be nice for people to know what's
> what from the outset. It would be great to be able to document it, and
> provide formatters to help with contributions (as I think Emmanuel
> suggested previously).
>
> For discussion below then are comments from the other thread, and a few
> other things.
>
> - The base standard is defined by the "Code Conventions for Java"
> document[1].
>
> - Layout
> Tabs: Use spaces, not tabs.
> Tab Width: 4
> Column Width: 120
>
> - General
> Variables should be final where possible.
> Parameters should be final.
>
> - Comments / Annotations
> Types: All types should have reasonable Javadoc.
> Methods: All methods should have reasonable Javadoc, with the exception
> of accessors which retrieve and set only.
> @author: should not be used.
>
> - Testing
> New code requires reasonable tests; modified code must have reasonable
> tests where not previously created.
>
> - Deviation
> Deviation from the standards is permitted where it enhances
> readability/maintainability. Roger gave a specific example; perhaps we
> can reference this later.
>
> Thanks!
> Johnathan
>
>
> [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/codeconvtoc-136057.html
>
>
>

Reply via email to