Vincent Massol wrote: > On Apr 15, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > >> On 04/15/2010 12:55 PM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote: >>> I would like to propose changing checkstyle.xml to allow checkstyle to be >>> enabled and disabled >>> using inline comments. I propose this with some reservation because this >>> can be a slippery slope >>> but I would rather see the problems isolated in the file than the file >>> excluded. >>> Also I think this can be used to enforce checkstyle on changes made to code >>> in big files in >>> the old core. >> I don't like it very much, since it adds non-code elements in the source >> file. A source file should contain as little languages as possible, and >> we already have Java + Javadoc + HTML + English comments + a few different types of annotations + remnants of aspectj in some places (?).
>> , adding checkstyle config would be too much. I'm not sure I would call CHECKSTYLE:ON and CHECKSTYLE:OFF configuration. Also I would want to define a best practice that it only be used in legacy code. > > I agree with Sergiu. > > Thanks > -Vincent > >> Can't the error be solved in other ways? What exactly is the problem? I had planned to use it for fixing most of mailsender api while excluding a method which has too many parameters but changing it would be an api break. I could also see applications when code is added to the old core such as XWiki.java and XWikiDocument.java. I'm not disappointed to see this shot down, introducing tools which make it easier to write dirty code was something I had some reservations about from the beginning. Caleb >> -- >> Sergiu Dumitriu >> http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
