I am well aware that I'm not producing new code, only making it more
readable -- for myself, maybe.
Readability means similar patterns, and dissimilarities sometimes grind my
gears.
We may argue about what is more readable
foo = foo == null ? bar : foo;
or
if (foo == null) {
foo = bar;
}
(I prefer the latter, you see) or maybe you would bother to comment on the
4 PR:s sitting at Github since summer...
Gintas
P.S. Please make noise -- dum spiro spero ;-)
2017-12-08 16:24 GMT+01:00 Dominique Devienne <ddevie...@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
> g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So, my rule was simple: an "if ((..." with multiple leading parens is
> only
> > necessary where the logical condition is indeed complex.
> >
>
> I guess my point is more that such changes are a bit futile,
> and code churn just for the sake of it. It's also somewhat inconsistent
> since in ternaries you added parens instead of removing them.
> Elsewhere you removed lines between cases.
> Or changed ternaries into if's. Etc...
> These are zero-sum gains IMHO.
>
> If you actually worked in that area of the code, or made fixes in there,
> "drive by" style changes might be more justified, even though like Jaikiran
> mentioned one should refrain in general from doing so in a collective code
> base.
>
> I'll leave it at that. I don't want to make a big deal of it, nor temper
> any enthusiasm
> for engaging with the Ant or Ivy code-bases. I just think there are better
> uses of
> everyone's brain cycles (doing the changes or reviewing the commits) than
> on such changes. --DD
>
> PS: An yes, I can see the irony of me making noises about it instead of
> just letting it go...
>
