Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-05 Thread Vincent Hennebert
On 03/03/12 00:57, Glenn Adams wrote: snip/ 2. for NoWhitespaceAfter, specified that line breaks are allowed after DOT; if this isn't done, then one cannot break a long line before *or* after DOT, and consequently could force long lines when not desired; this because the default settings for

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-05 Thread Glenn Adams
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.comwrote: On 03/03/12 00:57, Glenn Adams wrote: snip/ 2. for NoWhitespaceAfter, specified that line breaks are allowed after DOT; if this isn't done, then one cannot break a long line before *or* after DOT, and

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-05 Thread Glenn Adams
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.comwrote: On 03/03/12 00:57, Glenn Adams wrote: snip/ 2. for NoWhitespaceAfter, specified that line breaks are allowed after DOT; if this isn't done,

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-02 Thread Vincent Hennebert
Please can we wait to reach an agreement before making any changes? I realize the thread in @general hasn’t made any progress in 3 weeks and I’ll try to revive it, but making changes now will just make things more confusing. In particular, I think we want to all use the same version of Checkstyle

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-02 Thread Glenn Adams
I think we will need to come to an agreement (on the final set of 5.5 rules) incrementally rather than all at once. Furthermore, implementing the changes to accommodate the new rules will also (most likely) occur incrementally. While this is being done, it is useful to not disturb the checkstyle

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-02 Thread Vincent Hennebert
OK, I understand your approach now. Makes sense. The discussion on general@ can continue in parallel then. I’m OK with progressively fixing the warnings in different sets of commits and I agree with your proposed list. Will you also fix the tests? Eventually we want to check them as well. I’d be

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-02 Thread Glenn Adams
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.comwrote: I’d be happy to fix RegexpSingleLine and NewLineAtEndOfFile if that helps. Sure, that will help divide the effort. One way you might do this (which I will use), is: (1) changing the new checkstyle.* params in your

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-02 Thread Glenn Adams
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.comwrote: Will you also fix the tests? Eventually we want to check them as well. I agree that we will want to do so, but I'd prefer to handle the currently checkstyle tested code first, and then subsequently do a separate fix

Re: checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-02 Thread Glenn Adams
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote: ParenPad1 MethodParamPad 4316 WhitespaceAfter 2203 ExplicitInitialization 795 Not implemented. I oppose enabling ParenPad or MethodParamPad for two

checkstyle-5.5 support, updated rules

2012-03-01 Thread Glenn Adams
In order to proceed on Vincent's proposed new checkstyle rules [1], I've committed support for checkstyle-5.5 and the new rules [2]. [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/xmlgraphics-general/201202.mbox/%3c4f2c1d25.8010...@gmail.com%3e [2]