At work, I've switched from final everywhere to final everywhere but local variables while maintaining effective finality instead. I just wish Java had final be the default.
On 10 February 2017 at 05:34, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > Generally agree except that we agreed that the final qualifier was > optional. This may not be easy (or possible?) to verify automatically > anyway. > > Otherwise all looks reasonable. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 10, 2017, at 17:55, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com> > wrote: > > Seems reasonable. > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I agree with all that! :-) >> >> Gary >> >> >> On Feb 9, 2017 7:05 PM, "Matt Sicker" <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I was browsing through the site and took a look at the component reports. >> Checkstyle alone seems close to pointless as there are over 200 errors in >> log4j-api alone. log4j-core has over 2000 errors. Even new files that were >> formatted with our formatter settings such as the CassandraAppender plugin >> have import ordering errors. I also disagree with some of the rules >> configured, but that doesn't really matter when we don't enforce it in the >> first place. >> >> Anyways, what's the point of configuring this and adding checkstyle >> comments yet not even using it? The only project I've come across in the >> wild so far that has checkstyle configured properly was Spring Boot, and >> your pull request has to pass the checkstyle check to even be mergeable. >> >> Perhaps if we wish to actually use it, we could loosen the rules down to >> a much smaller set that actually matches the formatter settings in >> src/ide/. If the rules matched our code base, then we could also have >> Jenkins run checkstyle checks which would keep us informed when we mess up, >> and it would also be useful for pull requests (I've had to reformat many >> patches in the past). >> >> Related, there's the style guide <https://logging.apache.org/lo >> g4j/2.x/javastyle.html> which I'm pretty sure I've never even looked at >> before. This could also be normalized with our formatter files. I've >> generally thought of our code style summarized as: >> >> * 4 space indent >> * use final >> * no star imports outside tests (and those should generally be static >> imports) >> * imports should be in some sort of alphabetical order (this is really >> difficult to match between IntelliJ and Eclipse for some reason; I've had >> rather obnoxious fights about this in the past thanks to >> import-order-induced merge conflicts) >> * try to stick to unix line endings, but we're rather mixed still >> * every file needs a license header unless it's impossible to include >> comments >> * use CamelCaseClassNames, even for acronyms >> * no hungarian notation or other distracting naming conventions >> * otherwise stick to typical Sun style that everyone basically recognizes >> (that the JDK doesn't even use itself) >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> >> >> > > > -- > [image: MagineTV] > > *Mikael Ståldal* > Senior software developer > > *Magine TV* > mikael.stal...@magine.com > Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com > > Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this > message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message > (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not > copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, > you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply > email. > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
