> 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.

True!  The reason I send these reports to the list is that:

# it's easy - the report takes about 10 minutes to create
# it occasionally triggers good discussions like the current one
# it's fun to see all the projects side by side in any kind of view
# it kind of lightens things up sometimes

> 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.

I totally concur that unit tests are far more important than unused
imports, and I applaud your unit test coverage.  80% is awesome.  



To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to