[forge-dev] Wondering about coding convention #philosophy

[Lennart Jörelid]

While there are several ways to do this, I would prefer (and suggest)
something a little more tangible than standardizing by convention (i.e.
what is generated by Forge). It would be good to highlight the coding
convention in a separate (maven) project, presumably residing inside the
reactor.

I would suggest something like:

<dependency>
    <groupId>se.jguru.nazgul.tools.codestyle</groupId>
    <artifactId>nazgul-codestyle</artifactId>
    <version>2.0.9</version>
</dependency>

This will - in turn - be used by all plugins defined in the reactor parent
pom, and by IDEs integrating in Forge. Also, the codestyle would be useable
for other developers in other projects. In my opinion, this is a matter of
usability for developers wanting to use Forge properly, as well as
developers working on the Forge codebase itself. Currently, one is more or
less required to use Eclipse to have some notion of getting a codestyle
which is similar or identical to the style used by the other Forge
developers.
So ... long story made short. I would suggest formalizing the codestyle -
for use in generated code, for use within the Forge reactor and for simple
inclusion in other reactors as well.
2013/10/21 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter at gmail.com>

> Hey Antonio!
>
> You are absolutely correct. We really need to standardize (and improve in
> general) most of the code that Forge generates. Really it works, but I
> think that we can do much better to set a good example.
>
> These are good issues to track :)
>
> ~Lincoln
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 10:29 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Antonio!
>>
>> Thanks for your feedback! We'll consider your suggestions for the Forge 2
>> REST code generation and the scaffold. In the meanwhile could you file a
>> JIRA feature request so we don't lose track of this?
>>
>> Thank you very much!
>>
>> George Gastaldi
>>
>> Em 20/10/2013, às 14:51, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.mailing at gmail.com>
>> escreveu:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I love Forge because it generates code. And that's why my customers start
>> to love it too. Basically, they look at Forge as the "way to write Java
>> EE code" or if you like "if those guys write code like this, then we
>> should".
>>
>> I am digging into some details of the generated code (I am writing a blog
>> about several architectural styles starting with Forge) and I feel coding
>> convention should be homogenized. I know extensions are written by
>> different individuals, but some basic coding conventions should be applied.
>> For example, when you generate a web app with REST and Faces scaffolding,
>> you get some difference :
>>
>>    - Faces Backing Bean use *query builder* (e.g getAll method is
>>    entityManager.createQuery(criteria.select(criteria.from(Book.class))).getResultList();
>>    and
>>    - REST Endpoint use *dynamic queries* (the list all method is "SELECT
>>    DISTINCT b FROM Book b ORDER BY b.id"))
>>
>> Method names are different and do the same :
>>
>>    - JSF : getAll
>>    - REST : listAll
>>
>>
>> Attributes
>>
>>    -    private EntityManager em;
>>    -    private EntityManager entityManager;  // em would be better
>>
>> Or the use of this keyword (JSF beans use this.entityManager instead
>> of directly em in REST)
>>
>> And there are several examples like this. If Forge is seen as "the way of
>> writing code" maybe something should be created to get homogenized code.
>> PMD, Checkstyle, human review and so one.....
>>
>> Just wondering....
>>
>>
>> --
>> Antonio Goncalves
>> Software architect and Java Champion
>>
>> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>
>>  | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG<http://www.parisjug.org/>
>>  | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Baxter, III
> http://ocpsoft.org
> "Simpler is better."
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>



-- 

--
+==============================+
| Bästa hälsningar,
| [sw. "Best regards"]
|
| Lennart Jörelid
| EAI Architect & Integrator
|
| jGuru Europe AB
| Mölnlycke - Kista
|
| Email: lj at jguru.se
| URL:   www.jguru.se
| Phone
| (skype):    jgurueurope
| (intl):     +46 708 507 603
| (domestic): 0708 - 507 603
+==============================+
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20131021/2e74cc9b/attachment-0001.html