I'm not a committer, so take my advice any way you like. /me ascends high horse
An empty loop is 99.9% of the time a coding error. There's a reason why pmc, checkstyle and findbugs trigger on this type of programming. In my opinion, writing code that clearly shows intent is a pre, and code that doesn't look like a bug even better. Empty blocks are bad code, unless they override a method or provide an empty implementation to an interface method. If you do need an empty block, you can probably rewrite the code such that the empty block is no longer necessary, or if that hides the intent even worse, provide a comment that you intentionally left the block empty. Your future maintainers will thank you for that. /me descends high horse That said, this can easily be considered a bike shed discussion, so I'll leave it at this. Martijn On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Greg Brown<[email protected]> wrote: >> It's legal and technically correct Java, but I prefer to write such >> things like this: >> >> while (iterator.hasNext()) {} >> >> to make it obvious that it's an empty block. > > If others feel strongly that this makes the intent more explicit, I will > change it. > > What about cases like this: > > if (...) { > // Do something meaningful > } else if (...) { > // Do something meaningful > } > > Should we also include an empty else block to complete the conditional? > > > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.0
