+1 for expanded imports. Regards, Hiram
On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 12:47, James Strachan wrote: > +1 for expand imports. It makes reading the code easier. Code is there > to be read by humans - so anything which helps comprehension (while not > going stale like too much documentation can do) is a very good thing. > > I often tend to do an 'organise imports' in eclipse when code starts > having unused imports in it etc. > > > On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 05:44 pm, Alex Blewitt wrote: > > > Has anyone got any preferences between using: > > > > import java.util.* > > > > or > > > > import java.util.Vector > > import java.util.Enumeration > > > > etc. > > > > (Yes, I know I should be using List instead of Vector :-) > > > > Despite some articles trying to claim otherwise, there's really very > > little difference between the two as far as the code is concerned. In > > fact, you could argue that the import package.Type is actually slower > > than the import package.* variant as there's more text to be parsed. > > > > The only real difference IMNSO is that if you have > > > > import java.util.* > > > > then this says 'This type is dependent on types in the java.util > > package" > > > > whereas > > > > import java.util.Vector > > import java.util.Enumeration > > > > says "I specifically depend on Vector and Enumeration in the java.util > > package" > > > > People who use powerful IDEs (i.e.,they write the import statements > > for you) generally prefer the more verbose and detailed import types; > > those using text editors will no doubt prefer to use the package > > wildcards. > > > > Any votes on which one is better/worse/standard? > > > > Alex. > > > > > > James > ------- > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ -- /************************** * Hiram Chirino * Partner * Core Developers Network **************************/
