Coding standards (was Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-3531) DatabasePermission uses a JDK 1.4 method that is not present in J2ME/CDC/Foundation.)

[Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net>]

Rick Hillegas wrote:
>
> Here's what the community approved: 
> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE---Approve-coding-conventions-for-the-Derby-project-td5771191.html 
>
>
> We are supposed to use spaces rather than tabs and indentation should 
> be 4 spaces according to the included standard 
> (http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConvTOC.doc.html). 
> However, we also allowed ourselves plenty of wiggle room in old code.
Well there were quite a few rumblings during the vote so I am not 
totally sure it passed or at least that consensus was reached.
 Here is the summary.
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--VOTE---Approve-coding-conventions-for-the-Derby-project-p5840119.html


Kathey

Re: Coding standards (was Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-3531) DatabasePermission uses a JDK 1.4 method that is not present in J2ME/CDC/Foundation.)

[Narayanan <V....@Sun.COM>]

Kathey Marsden wrote:
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>
>> Here's what the community approved: 
>> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE---Approve-coding-conventions-for-the-Derby-project-td5771191.html 
>>
>>
>> We are supposed to use spaces rather than tabs and indentation should 
>> be 4 spaces according to the included standard 
>> (http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConvTOC.doc.html). 
>> However, we also allowed ourselves plenty of wiggle room in old code.
I always felt uneasy about following the clue from old code. There are 
many places in the code base where tabs and
spaces are used interchangeably. This rule basically

1) Can create ambiguity when both tabs and spaces exist
2) Cause bad code style to just worsen, since you would just follow the 
old coding style

But I understand the vote is over, and I actually voted +1 :), and the 
other points that were
delved upon seemed quite reasonable.

Narayanan
> Well there were quite a few rumblings during the vote so I am not 
> totally sure it passed or at least that consensus was reached.
> Here is the summary.
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--VOTE---Approve-coding-conventions-for-the-Derby-project-p5840119.html 
>
>
>
> Kathey
>
>

Re: Coding standards

[Rick Hillegas <Ri...@Sun.COM>]

Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
> Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>   
>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>     
>>> Here's what the community approved:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE---Approve-coding-conventions-for-the-Derby-project-td5771191.html 
>>>
>>>
>>> We are supposed to use spaces rather than tabs and indentation
>>> should be 4 spaces according to the included standard
>>> (http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConvTOC.doc.html). However,
>>> we also allowed ourselves plenty of wiggle room in old code.
>>>       
>> Well there were quite a few rumblings during the vote so I am not
>> totally sure it passed or at least that consensus was reached.
>>     
>
> Do rumblings nullify the results of a vote? According to the voting
> guidelines [1], votes on procedural issues have passed if there are more
> favourable votes than unfavourable ones, which I think was the case in
> that vote. Also, no one can veto a vote on a procedural issue.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>   
I think the vote technically passed but the support for it was weak 
compared to other issues we have voted on. I suspect that weak support 
translates into weak enforcement. In any event, awareness of the 
approved standard will improve if we clean up the contributors' checklist.

Regards,
-Rick

Re: Coding standards

[Knut Anders Hatlen <Kn...@Sun.COM>]

Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>
>> Here's what the community approved:
>> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE---Approve-coding-conventions-for-the-Derby-project-td5771191.html 
>>
>>
>> We are supposed to use spaces rather than tabs and indentation
>> should be 4 spaces according to the included standard
>> (http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/html/CodeConvTOC.doc.html). However,
>> we also allowed ourselves plenty of wiggle room in old code.
> Well there were quite a few rumblings during the vote so I am not
> totally sure it passed or at least that consensus was reached.

Do rumblings nullify the results of a vote? According to the voting
guidelines [1], votes on procedural issues have passed if there are more
favourable votes than unfavourable ones, which I think was the case in
that vote. Also, no one can veto a vote on a procedural issue.

[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

-- 
Knut Anders