+1 on not using wildcard import .

On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Peter Somogyi <psomo...@cloudera.com>
wrote:

> I like the layout you suggested Chia-Ping and also to check this in the
> precommit run.
> Shall we also add "not to use * imports" to the verification?
>
> On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > bq.  I guess you meant attention.
> > You are right. sorry for the misspelling. ☹
> >
> > On 2017-10-01 23:33, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > bq. hold our attraction
> > >
> > > I guess you meant attention.
> > >
> > > The suggestions under Q1 are good.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > I noticed the code conflict occurs on the imports frequently. To
> > resolve
> > > > the conflict is a complete waste of time, so i feel it is time to
> > update
> > > > our imports layout and hold our attraction on it.
> > > >
> > > > The import layout is shown below. (see hbase_eclipse_formatter.xml)
> > > > javax.*
> > > > blank line
> > > > java.*
> > > > blank line
> > > > import all other imports
> > > > blank line
> > > > import static all other imports
> > > >
> > > > Q1:
> > > > As i see it, two updates should be considered.
> > > > 1) Should we move the "import static" to the top? (It seems most of
> > files
> > > > have its static imports on the top)
> > > > 2) Should we move the shaded class into new blocks?
> > > >
> > > > The new layout looks like this.
> > > > import static all other imports
> > > > blank line
> > > > javax.*
> > > > blank line
> > > > java.*
> > > > blank line
> > > > org.*
> > > > blank line
> > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.shaded.*
> > > > blank line
> > > > import all other imports
> > > >
> > > > Q2:
> > > > Should we check the import layout before committing? Perhaps we can
> > > > address this in the HBASE-18438. The issue try to add the check of
> > unused
> > > > imports
> > > >
> > > > Any suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > --
> > > > Chia-Ping
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to