I still don't understand what the hubub about unused imports is about.
Tapestry is pretty clean of them, but even if it wasn't, I wouldn't say that
code quality suffered.  I mean, there's some fractional difference in
compile speed I guess, and a tiny difference in code comprehension that is
completely eclipsed by decent comments and JavaDoc.  There are other tools
out there that do a better job of analyzing the code itself for
deficiencies.

I'd much rather see folks working to create JUnit test suites and publishing
their code coverage results.  Tapestry uses a framework called Clover, which
is free for open source projects and produces a pretty result (using
Velocity, btw).

http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry/doc/clover/

I'm very proud of the 80% coverage (on 23K NCLOC, 23000 lines of code
excluding comments) and expect to push this to 90% before 2.4 GAs.

--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Copeland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 2:58 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Another unused import statement report is out...
> 
> 
> ....unused imports are down 40% since last November, crikey!
> 
> http://cvs.apache.org/~tcopeland/jakarta_bad_imports.htm
> 
> Past reports can be found here - 
> http://cvs.apache.org/~tcopeland/, and mad > props to the 
> xml-xalan project, who went from 1421 unused imports to 2 in 
> the last month.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Tom Copeland
> InfoEther
> 703-486-4543 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]

Reply via email to