+1 to allowing in tests for now On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 12:51 PM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Jumping in, I'm ok to allow it in tests for a trial period too. I would > imagine in test methods especially it's of much less concern, where the > code is much simpler to read, and also safer to change to types later on. > > On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 16:46, Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
