To the style rant, I mean. On 05 Sep 2014, at 13:40, Marcus Lagergren <marcus.lagerg...@oracle.com> wrote:
> +1 > > On 05 Sep 2014, at 12:46, Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipi...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >> On 09/05/2014 12:09 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8057654/webrev.00/ >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8057654 >> >> Random style rant of the week, not particularly about this concrete >> patch. Can we please try to systematically use more >> readable/robust/secure idioms? E.g.: >> >> a) Always have curly braces around the blocks? >> >> if (ok && ...) { >> ok = false; >> } >> if (!ok) { >> throw misMatchedTypes(...); >> } >> return rtype; >> >> vs. >> >> if (ok && ...) >> ok = false; >> if (!ok) >> throw misMatchedTypes(...); >> return rtype; >> >> Apple's "goto fail;" bug, anyone? >> >> b) Have only a single initialization per line? >> >> boolean match = true; >> boolean fail = false; >> vs. >> boolean match = true, fail = false; >> >> c) Always have parentheses in ternary operators predicates? >> >> int foldVals = (rtype == void.class) ? 0 : 1; >> vs. >> int foldVals = rtype == void.class ? 0 : 1; >> >> Thanks, >> -Aleksey. >> >> > _______________________________________________ mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
