On Sep 5, 2008, at 6:00 PM, Jess Holle wrote:

> There are limitations to the "quick fix" abilities provided by this  
> approach, but I greatly value this approach as it forces the focus  
> onto the resulting code, not the grammar and syntax.
>
> PMD has some good stuff too -- and I'd advise using both.  On the  
> flip side in an organization it and other source based analyzers can  
> fall prey to political machinations towards the one true style and  
> other silliness that has nothing to do with bugs and all to do with  
> politics, wasting time, and ticking off developers.  This would not  
> be the case if PMD provided no stylistic warnings, etc, but it and  
> most other source-based analyzers can't seem to resist the temptation.

Yeah, I kind of resisted adding style checks into PMD... now at least  
they're mostly separated off into the "braces" and the "naming"  
rulesets.  When I was using PMD I didn't use those ruleset... and  
also, I wrote the JavaCC grammar so that it discarded most comments  
which had a nice benefit that we couldn't do Javadoc checks :-)  
"@return String".... yes, yes, I can see that in method signature,  
thank you....

Yours,

Tom

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to