On Dec 23, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote: >> would a preference help? > > Not really. You don't want to explain that to users and ask them to > change their settings before loading Seaside code? > > <rant> What if we would integrate Code Critics in the ClassBuilder and > throw an error whenever we try to compile a class that does not > satisfy on of the included rules? For sure, that would lead to high > quality code. It is easy to imagine though, that such an approach > makes it nearly impossible to do anything useful anymore. </rant>
Why anything useful anymore? hijakcing Uppercase for private instance variable is not really good. This Singleton is NOT a globally accessible variable so why using Uppercase just because the compiler is weak. > Code Critics can be run independently of the compilation and is able > to point out violations of common patterns, like the fact that > instance variables should be lowercase. Personally I try to follow > most Code Critics rules, even if it makes sense to do it different in > some cases. I am in favour of naming instance variables in lowercase, > however this is not something the compiler should enforce. It is. This is the job of the compiler to reject code not following basic rules. Of course you can externalize the checks. But then what is a valid program? But indeed we should run code critics and build a good set of rules. I would love to do that. > > > Cheers, > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
