> I would like to remove this altogether from tests and ban it too in a week or > two. I took "ban it too in a week or two" as an indicator of intent. Looks like that's not what you intended.
I believe at least David and I both use and would like to continue using "var" when working on tests. As for the rest of the people in favor of it in the thread, I don't have an intuition there. There's no real harm in us banning it in prod checkstyle and leaving it in tests for now. We can always ban it later if a super majority comes out of the woodwork saying they hate it. /shrug On Wed, Jan 8, 2025, at 4:05 AM, Štefan Miklošovič wrote: > Indeed, we don't. That's what "I would like to" means. > > I asked additional questions on 5th November wanting to know more about > people advocating for vars in tests -> no response. > > I also do not see any vars added since then. > > So, what do we have vars enabled for? > > 1) not enough time has passed, meaning we might see vars in tests committed > in the future, it is just too soon to see that. > 2) people are using vars locally but they are rewriting that to full types > upon committing? > > If 2) is true, why don't they just commit vars as we said it is OK, so 1) > would not be the case? > > If people want to use vars but they do not want to commit that, they can > still do it and build the project with -Dno-checkstyle=true. > > There were more people coming, saying they don't want to see that anywhere, > after we banned that in the production code and that somehow tilted the scale > in favor of banning for me but it was too late. > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 3:25 PM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: >> __ >>> I would like to remove this altogether from tests and ban it too in a week >>> or two. >> Don't think we had clear consensus here. >> >> On Sun, Jan 5, 2025, at 5:42 PM, Štefan Miklošovič wrote: >>> I would like to remove this altogether from tests and ban it too in a week >>> or two. >>> >>> I see that Berenguer and Ariel are against that completely and Maxim as >>> well. >>> >>> I was waiting for some time to see if the usage of this takes place so we >>> do not ban that for people who might use that prematurely but I just don't >>> see that happening. >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 11:25 AM Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> To me, this sounds like the style consistency throughout the project, >>>> so if we just allowed having the "var" keyword we would have a mix of >>>> new and old styles without any distant prospect of a unified style. >>>> >>>> We should evolve the code style from one unified form to another, thus >>>> either we use it everywhere and fix all the places where it's >>>> applicable, or forbid it, avoid having "mixed" styles. If everyone >>>> coded the way they liked, it would be a mess. >>>> >>>> I would vote -0.5 to allow it, and +1 to forbid it everywhere. >>>> >>>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 00:02, Štefan Miklošovič <smikloso...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > People who are OK with vars in tests - are you also the ones who are >>>> > going to write vars from now on yourself or you just do not mind if you >>>> > encounter it? >>>> > >>>> > There is a difference between >>>> > >>>> > "keep it in tests, I am going to use this, this is actually a good idea" >>>> > >>>> > and >>>> > >>>> > "keep it in tests if people are going to use it, I do not mind but I am >>>> > not going to change my style". >>>> > >>>> > If the latter is the case, then who is actually going to write tests on >>>> > a daily basis with vars? If one or two people then I guess it does not >>>> > make a lot of sense to keep it around. >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 11:10 PM Ariel Weisberg <ar...@weisberg.ws> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Hi, >>>> >> >>>> >> I don’t like `var` anywhere. Even if IntelliJ could automatically >>>> >> insert the concrete type it would still be a problem in the GH compare >>>> >> view. GH compare view is a real problem, because any time something is >>>> >> sufficiently obfuscated I have to bounce back and forth with an IDE, >>>> >> check out the code etc or just proceed with a weaker mental model of >>>> >> what is going on. >>>> >> >>>> >> I have finite mental energy to expend every day and I don’t want to >>>> >> spend it hunting down and then recalling what each instance of var >>>> >> means repeatedly. It uses almost no energy to read past extra type >>>> >> information (formatting means I don’t even need to parse it) or do a >>>> >> little extra typing/autocomplete >>>> >> >>>> >> Ariel >>>> >> >>>> >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024, at 1:13 PM, Štefan Miklošovič wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Hello, >>>> >> >>>> >> this should give you an idea >>>> >> >>>> >> grep --include '*.java' -r 'var ' src/ test/ >>>> >> >>>> >> I think this is a new concept here which was introduced recently with >>>> >> support of Java 11 / Java 17 after we dropped 8. >>>> >> >>>> >> What is your opinion? Are we free to use it wherever we want? I am >>>> >> quite conservative in this area and I will most probably still use >>>> >> types as we know them but maybe in tests we might relax it a little >>>> >> bit? Or production code with "var" is totally fine too without any >>>> >> concerns? I think this should be covered by the code style. >>>> >> >>>> >> Regards >>>> >> >>>> >> >>
