RE: More abuse of coding styles...
I agree - using the compiler to detect errors is such a stupid idea. Real programmers dont need that. Real programmers don't use compilers... java is compiled whereas JavaScript is interpreted. May be we should relax your affirmation ;) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:07, Daniel Rall wrote: Ceki Glc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and should perhaps look to exercise a different profession. Agreed. I agree - using the compiler to detect errors is such a stupid idea. Real programmers dont need that. -- Cheers, Pete *--* | Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want | | to test a man's character, give him power. | | -Abraham Lincoln | *--* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On 1/10/02 2:54 AM, Peter Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:07, Daniel Rall wrote: Ceki Glc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and should perhaps look to exercise a different profession. Agreed. I agree - using the compiler to detect errors is such a stupid idea. Real programmers dont need that. Real programmers don't use compilers... -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting Now what do we do? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:59, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On 1/10/02 2:54 AM, Peter Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:07, Daniel Rall wrote: Ceki Glc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and should perhaps look to exercise a different profession. Agreed. I agree - using the compiler to detect errors is such a stupid idea. Real programmers dont need that. Real programmers don't use compilers... too true ;) -- Cheers, Pete -- Don't play dumb with me. I happen to be an expert at that - Maxwell Smart -- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 22:16, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On 1/10/02 6:11 AM, Stephane Bailliez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] [...] Real programmers don't use compilers... It looks like there were needs for some punching balls to start 2002 :-) In 10 days there are more messages in jakarta-general than in the last 2 months. We got a lot accomplished though :) like always :) -- Cheers, Pete Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. - Locke -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
Stephane Bailliez wrote:
I can understand why:
public void setSomething(Object something){
something = something;
}
Another solution is
public void setSomething(Object something) {
this.something = something;
}
- Sam Ruby
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Sam Ruby wrote:
Stephane Bailliez wrote:
I can understand why:
public void setSomething(Object something){
something = something;
}
Another solution is
public void setSomething(Object something) {
this.something = something;
}
Just beware of this bug:
public void setSomething(Object somthing) { // something misspelled
this.something = something;
}
--
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Just beware of this bug:
public void setSomething(Object somthing) { // something misspelled
this.something = something;
}
Don't you use a spell checker on your code?
Actually this problem is one reason why it is better to use single letter
variable names. You can't spell them incorrectly.
:-) :-) :-)
Anyone seen the groundhog yet?
Conor
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
This thread goes so loong with all of you
showing yours that I can't resist showing mine:
public void setSomething(Object i_something)
{
m_something = i_something;
}
Or even...
public void setSomething(Object i_something)
{
Object something; // a local something
something = fixThat(i_something);
if (isCool(something))
{
m_something = i_something;
}
else
{
throw new IllegalArgumentException(What a bad thing we have
here!!!);
}
}
Prefix paranoia huh?
But I never mix class members with parameters or with local
vars due to similar spellings and misspellings and so.
Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
-Original Message-
From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:26 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Sam Ruby wrote:
Stephane Bailliez wrote:
I can understand why:
public void setSomething(Object something){
something = something;
}
Another solution is
public void setSomething(Object something) {
this.something = something;
}
Just beware of this bug:
public void setSomething(Object somthing) { // something misspelled
this.something = something;
}
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Craig R. McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Erik Hatcher wrote: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:27:52 -0500 From: Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More abuse of coding styles... Rule #1 from The Elements of Java Style is: Adhere to the style of the original IIRC, we actually had this rule explicitly in the JServ code conventions ... looks like it didn't make the transition into the Jakarta docs though. I am willing to make the xdocs change. Anyone opposed? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Ceki Gülcü [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and
should perhaps look to exercise a different profession.
Agreed.
The problem with
public void setSomething(Object something){
this.something = something;
}
is
public void setSomethingComplicated(Object sometingComplicateed){
this.somethingComplicated = somethingComplicated;
}
There's only possibility of problem there when you don't copy and
paste your variable names.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
At 07:07 PM 1/9/02 -0800, you wrote:
Ceki Gülcü [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and
should perhaps look to exercise a different profession.
Agreed.
The problem with
public void setSomething(Object something){
this.something = something;
}
is
public void setSomethingComplicated(Object sometingComplicateed){
this.somethingComplicated = somethingComplicated;
}
There's only possibility of problem there when you don't copy and
paste your variable names.
On the one hand, arrogance is never helpful, if you mean to be helpful. If
you want to show off how smart you are, on the other hand, it is a great
tool. The difference is whether you want to talk about yourself or the
subject-matter.
- micael
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:26, Steve Downey wrote: Your javac has a configuration setting for the class names of inner classes? Although the inner classes use a $ embedded, rather than as a lead character. It's a similar issue. And whats that got to do with the price of fish? $ is not valid in identifiers in java language (but fine in .class file format). The recommendation in C that _ is reserved for the implementor is not a linker issue, but more of a namespace scoping issue. errr go have a look at the evolution of c/linkers and the pains some people went through re different linker/header file combos. There isn't a good way of marking a function as to be used by the implementor or the compiler, in such a way that a programmer can not conflict with it. Java has private which accomplishes that. private is an access marker - it does not define any metatype. Java has a crap metadata infrastructure - thats one of the things that C# did far better than java. Its a feature people have been asking for since 1.0 days but sun keeps dropping the ball or implementing workarounds. But reserving some characters for the implementors is not really a bad thing. Sure it is - it makes it acceptable for them to write poor code. -- Cheers, Pete The perfect way is only difficult for those who pick and choose. Do not like, do not dislike; all will then be clear. Make a hairbreadth difference and heaven and earth are set apart; if you want the truth to stand clear before you, never be for or against. - Bruce Lee -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
-Original Message-
From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 9:53 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:26, Steve Downey wrote:
Your javac has a configuration setting for the class names of inner
classes? Although the inner classes use a $ embedded,
rather than as a lead
character. It's a similar issue.
And whats that got to do with the price of fish? $ is not valid in
identifiers in java language (but fine in .class file format).
$ is a perfectly fine character in a java identifier. Even as the initial
character. That's why it's specifically mentioned in the sun coding style
guide. It's legal, but not meant for use by all.
IOW:
class $ {
public int $() {
int $ = 5;
return $;
}
static public void main(String args[]) {
$ dollar = new $();
System.out.println(dollar.$());
}
}
is legal. Ugly as hell. But legal.
The recommendation in C that _ is reserved for the
implementor is not a
linker issue, but more of a namespace scoping issue.
errr go have a look at the evolution of c/linkers and
the pains some
people went through re different linker/header file combos.
Been there, done that, have burn marks. The identifier name space starting
with _ is reserved for implementors to provide such things as library
functions with external linkage, used by the rest of the library, without
running into conflicts with user declarations. The compiler is even entitled
to emit calls to these functions, or reference these variables, without your
direction. So if you name variables or functions things like _alloc, or
_err, and your program crashes and burns, you've got no one to blame but
yourself.
There isn't a good way
of marking a function as to be used by the implementor or
the compiler, in
such a way that a programmer can not conflict with it. Java
has private
which accomplishes that.
private is an access marker - it does not define any
metatype. Java has a
crap metadata infrastructure - thats one of the things that
C# did far better
than java. Its a feature people have been asking for since
1.0 days but sun
keeps dropping the ball or implementing workarounds.
But reserving some characters for the implementors is not
really a bad
thing.
Sure it is - it makes it acceptable for them to write poor code.
In what way does it make it acceptable for them to write poor code? For
example, the JSP spec reserves _jsp, jsp, _jspx and jspx for identifiers
used in the classes generated by the page compiler. What other way do you
propose to guarantee that the compiler won't generate names that conflict
with ones I declare in a page?
-SMD
This electronic mail transmission
may contain confidential information and is intended only for the person(s)
named. Any use, copying or disclosure by any other person is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify
the sender via e-mail.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On 1/5/02 11:22 PM, Steve Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In what way does it make it acceptable for them to write poor code? For example, the JSP spec reserves _jsp, jsp, _jspx and jspx for identifiers used in the classes generated by the page compiler. What other way do you propose to guarantee that the compiler won't generate names that conflict with ones I declare in a page? As a SWAG, I would think you could parse out the ones you declare, keep a list, and ensure you don't generate anything that conflicts? -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting He who throws mud only loses ground. - Fat Albert -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
Stephane Bailliez typed the following on 09:42 AM 1/4/2002 +
We had that discussion once on Commons, and many people liked the
underscore convention.
I can understand why:
public void setSomething(Object something){
something = something;
}
It is one of my major source of error when not using the '_' and I have seen
the error several times along with variable naming gymnastics to avoid the
this. people would use aSomething or theSomething or whatever. That look
crappy in the Javadoc.
The standard way to handle this is of course:
public void setSomething(Object something){
this.something = something;
}
Kief
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
-Original Message- From: Kief Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] It is one of my major source of error when not using the '_' and I have seen the error several times along with variable naming gymnastics to avoid the this. people would use aSomething or ^ theSomething or whatever. That look crappy in the Javadoc. The standard way to handle this is of course: [...] See above. People will often forget to type 'this.' for the same reason they forget to put braces around a single line statement: lazyness. I think we all do this from time to time...human nature you know... Stephane -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On 1/4/02 3:48 AM, Endre Stølsvik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
| It is amazing to me...with all the discussion about coding styles and
| following them, we still have people committing code that doesn't follow
| what rules we do have...
|
| on 1/3/02 11:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| Re: cvs commit: jakarta-commons/logging/src/java/org/apache/commons/logging
| SimpleLog.java
|
| +if(_showtime) {
|
| http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc8.html#367
|
| Variable names should not start with underscore _ or dollar sign $
| characters, even though both are allowed.
The _instanceVariable and also the __staticVariable idea makes real good
sense to me nowadays. Do you have any arguments against it? (btw; this is
a genuine question!)..
I used to do that all the time in C++ developent, although I put it at the
end
membervar_
It really helps, I think.
And while talking about code conventions; people writing like this:
if (something)
{
}
should be shot right there on the spot, in the act of typing it.
The ONLY way to write blocks is like this:
if (something) {
}
;)
You left out my 'favorite'
if ( something ) { }
:)
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
Now what do we do?
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
At 10:44 04.01.2002 +, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Kief Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
It is one of my major source of error when not using the '_' and I
have seen the error several times along with variable naming
gymnastics to avoid the this. people would use aSomething or
^
theSomething or whatever. That look crappy in the Javadoc.
The standard way to handle this is of course:
[...]
See above. People will often forget to type 'this.' for the same reason they
forget to put braces around a single line statement: lazyness.
I think we all do this from time to time...human nature you know...
Stephane
People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and
should perhaps look to exercise a different profession. The problem
with
public void setSomething(Object something){
this.something = something;
}
is
public void setSomethingComplicated(Object sometingComplicateed){
this.somethingComplicated = somethingComplicated;
}
--
Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Hey Jon,
It is not amazing. It is normal. The paragraph that you quoted says:
All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in
conformance to the Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language
as published by Sun. However, some projects may decide to override
these defaults and use their own defined conventions. For example, the
Turbine project has its own defined conventions which are similar to
the Sun standards but specify slightly different conventions.
Which really reads: we have conventions but you are free to ignore
them -- what people have flocked to do gleefully..
Cheers, Ceki
At 17:54 03.01.2002 -0800, you wrote:
It is amazing to me...with all the discussion about coding styles and
following them, we still have people committing code that doesn't follow
what rules we do have...
on 1/3/02 11:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: cvs commit: jakarta-commons/logging/src/java/org/apache/commons/logging
SimpleLog.java
+if(_showtime) {
http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc8.html#367
Variable names should not start with underscore _ or dollar sign $
characters, even though both are allowed.
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/source.html
All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in
conformance to the Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language as
published by Sun.
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
As a point of order:
The use of this is recommended by the Elements of Java Style, which is
cited in the Commons charter.
Though, I have myself been victimized by the trap Ceki mentions.
-Ted.
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and
should perhaps look to exercise a different profession. The problem
with
public void setSomething(Object something){
this.something = something;
}
is
public void setSomethingComplicated(Object sometingComplicateed){
this.somethingComplicated = somethingComplicated;
}
--
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: More abuse of coding styles...
-Original Message-
From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[...]
People who repeatedly forget to type this represent a minority and
should perhaps look to exercise a different profession. The problem
You are right, but I think you know perfectly what kind of horrors you can
find in most code out there and there is still shortage of 'developpers'.
Let's face it the code quality in Jakarta is extremely high compared with
what I have seen in the industry, the most horrible I have seen in my
limited experience being in the Defense and/or aeronautical industry. I was
beginning my career at this time and could not believe someone could come up
with sleep() to synchronize work between threads and complain that the OS
was buggy since it was 'working' differently on different computers...
with
[..]
public void setSomethingComplicated(Object sometingComplicateed){
this.somethingComplicated = somethingComplicated;
}
right.. I forgot the best one...I have been hit by this as well..
Stephane
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Jon Scott Stevens wrote: http://jakarta.apache.org/site/source.html All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in conformance to the Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language as published by Sun. -jon Sun ? ;-) I thought it was agreed a long time ago that jakarta.apache.org != Sun and that xml.apache.org != IBM Every time I have seen a discussion about coding styles, it is never with an altruistic bent. No one ever says I should change my coding style to be more like yours. No, it is always You should change your style to be more like mine. If someone writes clean, elegant code, it doesn't really matter if it's KR style or Whitesmith's style. If we had Michaelangelo working here, I really don't think that we would care if he were using marble or alabaster, the result would be magnificent enough. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
i'd just like to point out that i didn't write that bit of code (but
neither did i correct it).
personally speaking, i'm not going to risk having patches vetoed because i
try to correct the original author's coding style.
any committer who has the time and energy to fight is very welcome to
correct the many deviations from the standards that you'll find in the
commons (and in the other projects as well, no doubt).
- robert
On Friday, January 4, 2002, at 01:54 AM, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
It is amazing to me...with all the discussion about coding styles and
following them, we still have people committing code that doesn't follow
what rules we do have...
on 1/3/02 11:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: cvs commit: jakarta-
commons/logging/src/java/org/apache/commons/logging
SimpleLog.java
+if(_showtime) {
http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc8.html#367
Variable names should not start with underscore _ or dollar sign $
characters, even though both are allowed.
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/source.html
All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in
conformance to the Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language as
published by Sun.
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
on 1/4/02 8:05 AM, Bob Jamison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jakarta.apache.org != Sun That isn't the comparison that we are making here. -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
At 10:35 04.01.2002 -0800, you wrote: on 1/4/02 3:28 AM, Ceki Gülcü [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in conformance to the Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language as published by Sun. However, some projects may decide to override these defaults and use their own defined conventions. For example, the Turbine project has its own defined conventions which are similar to the Sun standards but specify slightly different conventions. Which really reads: we have conventions but you are free to ignore them -- what people have flocked to do gleefully.. Cheers, Ceki Keyword above: 'defined' Fine distinction. Keyword: fine (pun intended). -- Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
Rule #1 from The Elements of Java Style is:
Adhere to the style of the original
- Original Message -
From: robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Jakarta Commons Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: More abuse of coding styles...
i'd just like to point out that i didn't write that bit of code (but
neither did i correct it).
personally speaking, i'm not going to risk having patches vetoed because i
try to correct the original author's coding style.
any committer who has the time and energy to fight is very welcome to
correct the many deviations from the standards that you'll find in the
commons (and in the other projects as well, no doubt).
- robert
On Friday, January 4, 2002, at 01:54 AM, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
It is amazing to me...with all the discussion about coding styles and
following them, we still have people committing code that doesn't follow
what rules we do have...
on 1/3/02 11:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: cvs commit: jakarta-
commons/logging/src/java/org/apache/commons/logging
SimpleLog.java
+if(_showtime) {
http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc8.html#367
Variable names should not start with underscore _ or dollar sign $
characters, even though both are allowed.
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/source.html
All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in
conformance to the Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language
as
published by Sun.
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002 03:19, Steve Downey wrote: http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConventions.doc8.html#367 | Variable names should not start with underscore _ or dollar sign $ | characters, even though both are allowed. The _instanceVariable and also the __staticVariable idea makes real good sense to me nowadays. Do you have any arguments against it? (btw; this is a genuine question!).. Because those characters are used by implementors and code generators. all java code generators I use have configurable settings. They are legal, but not intended to be used by programmers. Not relevent for java. In C this may be so but that mainly had to do with how the linker mangled names. And this was more separated out between system-user code -- Cheers, Pete Sorry, I forgot to take my medication today. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Erik Hatcher wrote: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:27:52 -0500 From: Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More abuse of coding styles... Rule #1 from The Elements of Java Style is: Adhere to the style of the original IIRC, we actually had this rule explicitly in the JServ code conventions ... looks like it didn't make the transition into the Jakarta docs though. Craig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
