2011/10/23 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>: > On 22/10/2011 23:33, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >> 2011/10/23 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>: >>> On 22/10/2011 22:54, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1187778&view=rev >>>> affected a number of *.xsd and *.dtd files. >>>> >>>> I think we should not touch those without a good reason. > > <snip/> > >>> I don't see the harm in removing the trailing white-space from these >>> files. It shouldn't change their meaning. >> >> From technical point of view it should not. But all of them originate >> from somewhere, and I would not want them to differ from their >> originals more than necessary. > > That is a fair point. > > My own preference is for not having to list them as exclusions in the > checkstyle config. Thinking about it, I'm not sure how easy that would > be. It is easy enough to filter by file extension but that doesn't quite > work in this case. I'd rather not have a separate checkstyle file just > for trailing white-space but I don't see another way to exclude the spec > files. > > Given that diff tools can be easily configured to ignore white-space I'm > leaning towards leaving things as they currently are.
I am -1 on applying trailing whitespaces check on *.java files. It has no practical value. It does not improve readability. I do not see what it can be useful for. It is just useless nagging. There are file types where check for trailing whitespace is useful, e.g. *.properties files, (because whitespaces are not trimmed from the values that are read from the file and might be visible). But for *.java files I do not see any benefits. Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
