Re: Codeformatting finished
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi. > > Good, but some typo and other files suffer from same un-escaped > problem. Attached patch will fix typos and other files. Thanks, I commited your patch. I'll do a thorough check for unicode escapes tomorrow and will also take a look at Struan's fix. Seems like jIndent didn't do a very good job with unicode escapes... To jIndent's defence I must admit that I used version 2.1 which used to be free, this might have been fixed in newer commercial versions. Regarding jIndent breaking the 78 char linelength limit, that's to bad. jIndent usually does a very good job with this. I guess submitting patches with fixes for that would be ok. Tore > > === > SASAKI Suguru > mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Codeformatting finished
Hi. Good, but some typo and other files suffer from same un-escaped problem. Attached patch will fix typos and other files. === SASAKI Suguru mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] escaped.diff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Codeformatting finished
I've noticed that the formatter has been pretty aggressive in overriding the right margin. It has exceeded 80 cols in files which had conformed to that margin (e.g. DocumentReader.java), going to such lengths as to merge string constants which had previously been split with "+", and merging comment lines! Cheeky. I agree it is much more important to get a consistent indentation and replacement of tabs with spaces, but is it generally regarded as desirable to have files fold lines at 79? If so, is it OK to submit patches which achieve this for errant files as they are encountered? Peter -- Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://powerup.com.au/~pbwest "Lord, to whom shall we go?" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Codeformatting finished
Yeah, I caught this too. I fixed it and committed it. Please check it out in case I made a typo in the manual edits. -Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 1:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Codeformatting finished Hi. After codeformatting, some file is broken, I guess. Looking into org/apache/fop/fonts/Glyphs.java and org/apache/fop/layout/LineArea.java, for example, unicode-escaped characters(such as "\u2297") become unescaped or "?". (Maybe, characters in ISO-8859-1 got unescaped, and others become "?".) Though Fop still compiles , these may cause malformed output. Any idea? === SASAKI Suguru mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Codeformatting finished
Hi. After codeformatting, some file is broken, I guess. Looking into org/apache/fop/fonts/Glyphs.java and org/apache/fop/layout/LineArea.java, for example, unicode-escaped characters(such as "\u2297") become unescaped or "?". (Maybe, characters in ISO-8859-1 got unescaped, and others become "?".) Though Fop still compiles , these may cause malformed output. Any idea? === SASAKI Suguru mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Codeformatting finished
On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Arved Sandstrom wrote: > I see in ViewCVS that everything looks OK, and I managed to 'cvs update' one > file as a test, but I can't 'cvs checkout' at the moment. Anyone else having > this problem? Nope, I checked out just now. [snip] > If I can figure out exactly what it is you did, and restore my 'cvs > checkout', I can take care of 3 of these. They were affected by marker > support, basically. Shouldn't conflict with Mark's changes, in a logical > sense, but 'patch' might not think so. [snip] > OK, I'm not sure I understand 100%. The current CVS does _not_ reflect Mark's > patch at all, and you have a patch which applies a portion of Mark's patch, > to the _formatted_ codebase. Is that correct? And it is then a question of > applying the rest of the patch to Block, AreaTree, Page, and TestConverter, > right? Just trying to get my head straight. :-) You're right. It was getting a little late and reformatting took much longer time then estimated - guess i boggered up my brain :) The current CVS does not reflect Mark's patch. The original attachment contained a portion of Mark's patch to the formatted codebase. Tore > > Regards, > Arved > > P.S. Thanks for the yeoman effort. > > -- > Fairly Senior Software Type > e-plicity (http://www.e-plicity.com) > Halifax, Nova Scotia > Wireless * B2B * J2EE * XML > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Codeformatting finished
On Monday 30 July 2001 21:38, you wrote: > It's also a bit unfortunate that Mark's patch isn't yet commited. Anyone > volunteer for this? It's just too big for me. I see in ViewCVS that everything looks OK, and I managed to 'cvs update' one file as a test, but I can't 'cvs checkout' at the moment. Anyone else having this problem? Yeah, I'd like to get that patch in, too, before doing up this next release. > Here's what I did with it: > I applied the patch to the code before formatting it. > It seems like it has been some changes in the repository after you created > the patch. The following files was rejected: > > src/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/Block.java > src/org/apache/fop/layout/AreaTree.java > src/org/apache/fop/layout/Page.java > src/org/apache/fop/tools/TestConverter.java If I can figure out exactly what it is you did, and restore my 'cvs checkout', I can take care of 3 of these. They were affected by marker support, basically. Shouldn't conflict with Mark's changes, in a logical sense, but 'patch' might not think so. > The rest of the files made it. So, I applied codeformatting and license > changing to those files and created a new patch which is attached to this > mail. That patch consists of the following files: > [ List of files ] OK, I'm not sure I understand 100%. The current CVS does _not_ reflect Mark's patch at all, and you have a patch which applies a portion of Mark's patch, to the _formatted_ codebase. Is that correct? And it is then a question of applying the rest of the patch to Block, AreaTree, Page, and TestConverter, right? Just trying to get my head straight. :-) Regards, Arved P.S. Thanks for the yeoman effort. -- Fairly Senior Software Type e-plicity (http://www.e-plicity.com) Halifax, Nova Scotia Wireless * B2B * J2EE * XML - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Codeformatting finished
I just finished codeformatting and also changed all .java files to use the short license. Unfortunately the size of the diff was so huge that ezml freaked out and the diff was not posted to fop-cvs... The repository was tagged with PRE_CODEFORMATTING just before formatting the code, so if it for some obscure reason introduced bugs or you want to look at the code before formatting, it's possible. It's also a bit unfortunate that Mark's patch isn't yet commited. Anyone volunteer for this? It's just too big for me. Here's what I did with it: I applied the patch to the code before formatting it. It seems like it has been some changes in the repository after you created the patch. The following files was rejected: src/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/Block.java src/org/apache/fop/layout/AreaTree.java src/org/apache/fop/layout/Page.java src/org/apache/fop/tools/TestConverter.java The rest of the files made it. So, I applied codeformatting and license changing to those files and created a new patch which is attached to this mail. That patch consists of the following files: src/org/apache/fop/apps/AWTStarter.java src/org/apache/fop/apps/CommandLineStarter.java src/org/apache/fop/apps/Driver.java src/org/apache/fop/apps/PrintStarter.java src/org/apache/fop/datatypes/IDReferences.java src/org/apache/fop/fo/FONode.java src/org/apache/fop/fo/FOText.java src/org/apache/fop/fo/FOTreeBuilder.java src/org/apache/fop/fo/FObjMixed.java src/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination/PageSequence.java src/org/apache/fop/pdf/PDFDocument.java src/org/apache/fop/pdf/PDFPage.java src/org/apache/fop/pdf/PDFPages.java src/org/apache/fop/pdf/PDFRoot.java src/org/apache/fop/render/PrintRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/Renderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/awt/AWTRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/mif/MIFRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/pcl/PCLRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/pdf/PDFRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/ps/PSRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/txt/TXTRenderer.java src/org/apache/fop/render/xml/XMLRenderer.java Tore newpatch.patch.gz - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
