[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-202?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13420702#comment-13420702
]
Jukka Zitting commented on OAK-202:
-----------------------------------
As noted by Julian in the similar JCR-3396 issue, such minor changes are not
always very clear-cut. What's simpler for one person might well be more complex
for another.
For example, revision 1364664 removed the redundant field initialization in
cases like the following:
{code}
private String value = null;
{code}
In cases like that I personally _prefer_ to have the explicit initial value in
place so I know that it's not a problem if the constructor fails to initialize
the field.
More generally many of such "simplifications" depend on personal taste and
preference, so in general I'd leave it up to whoever actually works on a
particular piece of code to decide which style to use. If people find that
confusing, let's document a shared coding style beyond the currently agreed
standard Java coding conventions. Until then I'm a bit annoyed by commits that
simply make such stylistic changes with no other benefit.
> Simplify the code when possible
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-202
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-202
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Thomas Mueller
> Priority: Minor
>
> Sometimes it's possible to simplify the code, for example:
> - making methods static when possible, so a reader knows the method doesn't
> change the state of an object
> - the "else" is unnecessary if the "if" block always returns
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
