Re: [hibernate-dev] Code style and whitespaces
2013/7/3 Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
The "original" rule was that parens should always be
separated by spaces.
E.g.:
if (isTrue ()) { ... }
Is clearly fugly.
if ( isTrue () ) { ... }
To me is clearly more readable.
Method/constructor declarations do not use spaces inside parens simply
because the arguments list cannot contain parens. Same for exception
catching btw..
Ah, I see. This reasoning makes sense, but IMO the rule is not really
apparent, I guess one just needs to know it. I don't really mind either
way, but at least method invocations and constructor invocations should be
handled consistently (i.e. both with white space following the reasoning
above).
On Jul 3, 2013 7:31 AM, "Gunnar Morling"
<gunnar(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
> I'm voting for having white spaces in catch as well as constructor
> invocations, the reason being to ensure a consistent style with method
> invocations, if, while etc. I don't see an advantage in having white space
> in some of these constructs but not in others.
>
>
> 2013/7/3 Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
>
>> There is a mix in ORM as well. My vote is for no spaces inside the
>> parens
>> for catch statements. I do like the spaces for if, for, while, etc
>> though.
>> On Jul 3, 2013 5:29 AM, "Hardy Ferentschik" <hardy(a)hibernate.org>
wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for 'catch ( IllegalArgumentException e )' - using white spaces
>> >
>> > On 3 Jan 2013, at 11:07 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Looking at the following patch:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > }
>> > > - catch (IllegalArgumentException e) {
>> > > + catch ( IllegalArgumentException e ) {
>> > >
>> > > would you consider it an improvement in terms of consistency with the
>> > > Hibernate style?
>> > >
>> > > It has always been my interpretation that we use whitespaces inside
>> > > blocks, like:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > if ( condition)
>> > > //rather than
>> > > if (condition)
>> > >
>> > > but we don't for constructor invocations:
>> > >
>> > > new Wrapper(type, param);
>> > > //rather than
>> > > new Wrapper( type, param );
>> > >
>> > > and we also do not (usually) for catch.
>> > >
>> > > I know that might sound like inconsistent, but the point is
>> > > readability: I've got used to it and I could swear that the
>> *different
>> > > treating* helps with eyeball code scanning.. but I realize that could
>> > > be a very personal opinion.
>> > >
>> > > So since we're encoding this rule now in checkstyle, which one
shall
>> > > it be for the catch statements?
>> > >
>> > > My guts vote goes to
>> > >
>> > > }
>> > > catch (IllegalArgumentException e) {
>> > > ...
>> > >
>> > > but I'd prefer to follow the convention from ORM, if you guys have
a
>> > > clear rule :-)
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Sanne
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > hibernate-dev mailing list
>> > > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > hibernate-dev mailing list
>> > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>
>
>