+1 for the codestyle document.
Another Eclipse formatter limitation (already discussed with trygve):
comment blocks doesn't start on column 1.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=34552
Cheers,
Vincent
2006/8/24, Kenney Westerhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Vincent Siveton wrote:
> Hi Kenney,
>
> Other problems exist in the Eclipse codestyle (See MNG-2522 Regression
> for the Eclipse codestyle)
> If you are an Eclipse user, it should be great if you have time to
> review it.
>
I'm looking into it.
I'm having a hard time finding out what the correct formatting is,
though. It seems the IDEA version is slightly underconfigured and
relying on a lot of IDEA defaults. The checkstyle configuration isn't
checking a lot of things.
I think we need some textual document describing this. Here's a shot at
some of the issues:
-----------
1) newline + indent by one before 'extends' and 'implements'
public class Bla
extends A
implements B
{
QUESTION: is this right?
- throws on a new line, exceptions on one line; wrapped exceptions same
indentation as the throws:
public void bla()
throws Exception, Exception, Exception, ...
Exception, Exception
QUESTION: is this right?
(I prefer the following, btw:
public void bla()
throws Exception,
Exception,
Exception
)
2) Wrap all arguments for constructors, method invocations etc using
indent by column:
foo.bar().something( a, b, c,
d, e );
QUESTION: Is this right?
Although eclipse has some problems, it'll render it as:
foo.bar().something(
a, b, c,
d, e );
I personally prefer:
foo.bar().something(
a, b, c, d, e
);
or possibly
foo.bar().something( a, b,
c, d, e
);
or this, as eclipse doesn't allow ');' to be on a new line when wrapping:
foo.bar().something( a, b,
c, d, e );
3) Wrap long method-invocation chains, indent on column:
foo.bar().baz()
.bla()
.blup()
Mixing this with long argument lists gets interesting..
QUESTION: Is this right? I've also seen
foo.bar().baz()
.bla().blup()
4) All { and } on a single line, not indented:
for ( a; b; c )
{
// indented code
}
5) 'if' parameters are continuously wrapped, indented by one:
for ( a = a + a + a
+ a + a; a < b
+ b + b + b; a
+= b )
{
}
QUESTION: Is this right?
(personally i'd prefer the 3 parts to be on separate lines and indented
one more in this case, makes it more readable:
for ( a = a + a + a
+ a + a;
a < b + b + b
+ b;
a += b )
{
}
Maybe even indent on column although I hate non-tab-aligned indents.. ;)
)
6) Line wrapped operators at the beginning of the line:
a + a + a
+ a;
(instead of:
a + a + a +
a;
)
(possibly not indented, depending on context).
7) Spaces after ( and before ) except when empty or when it's a typecast:
( (Typecast) something ).foo()
-----------
If someone could confirm my assumptions I'll make sure the eclipse
codestyle reflects this, and possibly checkstyle too.
-- Kenney
> Cheers,
>
> Vincent
>
> 2006/8/24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Author: kenney
>> Date: Thu Aug 24 06:01:19 2006
>> New Revision: 434393
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=434393&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Changed '( typecast )' to '(typecast)' in eclipse codestyle, as this
>> is used everywhere in maven code.
>>
>> Modified:
>>
>> maven/site/trunk/src/site/resources/developers/maven-eclipse-codestyle.xml
>>
>>
>> Modified:
>> maven/site/trunk/src/site/resources/developers/maven-eclipse-codestyle.xml
>>
>> URL:
>>
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/site/trunk/src/site/resources/developers/maven-eclipse-codestyle.xml?rev=434393&r1=434392&r2=434393&view=diff
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
