Yep, absolutely that makes sense.
Jim
On Apr 26, 2006, at 7:03 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jim Marino wrote:
I agree poor test coverage is more important but this shouldn't be
a big deal - I'll even do it for all of the packages myself. I
think this is one of those incremental improvements that will make
the code more consistent and easier for people to understand
coming fresh into the project. I'm also proposing this for after
JavaOne and many of the more important items.
Jim
On Apr 26, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Jim Marino wrote:
So if we do not have the space restriction, checks for parameter
names, and run this only pre-commit, would you be o.k. with it?
I would like to have this in since it is a nice check and should
not be burdensome assuming people set the proper template in
their IDE.
Doing it that way would get me to +0 - I just think we're
focusing a little much on layout and not enough on e.g. testing.
I would like to hear what others have to say.
--
Jeremy
I'm +1 on the goal to enable checkstyle.
I'm also +1 on Dan's initial proposal which was to do this *after*
JavaOne.
Since most of us are busy now with testing and/or critical fixes
for our JavaOne release, I suggest that we try to sort out the
details of the style, spacing, typecasting, checking for parameter
names etc. after the release. Does that make sense?
--
Jean-Sebastien
