You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@giraph.apache.org by Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com> on 2012/07/01 17:35:27 UTC
Re: Order of imports
I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our diffs as
high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
uniformity.
Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports given a
set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks while
you're coding.
On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly don't
>care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible with
>them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
>extra effort to the code reviews.
>
>
>On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle rules for
>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>
>> http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html
>>
>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
>>related to
>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Avery
>>
>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>
>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you. While
>>>doing
>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering every
>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea to
>>>come up
>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>
>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>
>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>
>>> org.*
>>>
>>> com.*
>>>
>>> javax.*
>>> java.*
>>>
>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>
>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>
>>> Alessandro
>>>
>>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>.
Just in case anyone missed it, there's a patch at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-230.
Jakob/Hyunsik: this hopefully accommodates both stances (no checkstyle
hassles, no diff pollution).
On 7/2/12 12:44 PM, "Maja Kabiljo" <ma...@fb.com> wrote:
>I can help you with Eclipse.
>
>On 7/2/12 12:11 AM, "Alessandro Presta" <al...@fb.com> wrote:
>
>>We already have other conventions in checkstyle.xml that the IDEs have to
>>be configured for (no star imports is one).
>>As for Eclipse, I meant: can someone contribute the settings for that?
>>I think with those two we should be pretty well covered.
>>
>>Here's what I could find on Eclipse:
>>http://help.eclipse.org/helios/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.jdt.doc.use
>>r
>>%
>>2Freference%2Fpreferences%2Fjava%2Fcodestyle%2Fref-preferences-organize-i
>>m
>>p
>>orts.htm
>>
>>On 7/1/12 11:26 PM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>There needs to be special configuration for devs to support these new
>>>restrictions, if they are going to go in (-1 otherwise). And yes,
>>>Eclipse will need to be supported automatically as well. As for
>>>NetBeans... well, there may be some wiggle room there.
>>>
>>>
>>>On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>> I think we can also just include the pre-configured files in the
>>>>.idea/
>>>> folder in the project root. I can find out how that works.
>>>>
>>>> On 7/1/12 11:20 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>If IDE configurations should be provided, they can be available from
>>>>>the
>>>>>web page. For example, the section 'Generating Patches' in the home (
>>>>>http://giraph.apache.org) would be good place.
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Hyunsik Choi
>>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We
>>>>>>should
>>>>>> do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using
>>>>>>Eclipse?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it
>>>>>>will
>>>>>>be
>>>>>> >better if all coding convention is included in both IDE
>>>>>>configurations.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >--
>>>>>> >Hyunsik Choi
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our
>>>>>>rules
>>>>>> >> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can
>>>>>>continue
>>>>>>this
>>>>>> >> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Avery
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of
>>>>>>our
>>>>>> >>>diffs as
>>>>>> >>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level
>>>>>>of
>>>>>> >>> uniformity.
>>>>>> >>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>>>>>> >>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>>>>>> >>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports
>>>>>>given
>>>>>> >>>a
>>>>>> >>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run
>>>>>>checks
>>>>>> >>>while
>>>>>> >>> you're coding.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly
>>>>>>don't
>>>>>> >>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible
>>>>>>with
>>>>>> >>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add
>>>>>>any
>>>>>> >>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching
>>>>>><ac...@apache.org>
>>>>>> >>>>wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle
>>>>>>rules
>>>>>> >>>>>for
>>>>>> >>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<
>>>>>> http://checkst
>>>>>> >>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and
>>>>>>(most
>>>>>> >>>>> related to
>>>>>> >>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Avery
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you.
>>>>>>While
>>>>>> >>>>>> doing
>>>>>> >>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some
>>>>>>logic.
>>>>>> >>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports
>>>>>>reordering
>>>>>> >>>>>>every
>>>>>> >>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good
>>>>>>idea
>>>>>>to
>>>>>> >>>>>> come up
>>>>>> >>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> org.*
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> com.*
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> javax.*
>>>>>> >>>>>> java.*
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Alessandro
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Maja Kabiljo <ma...@fb.com>.
I can help you with Eclipse.
On 7/2/12 12:11 AM, "Alessandro Presta" <al...@fb.com> wrote:
>We already have other conventions in checkstyle.xml that the IDEs have to
>be configured for (no star imports is one).
>As for Eclipse, I meant: can someone contribute the settings for that?
>I think with those two we should be pretty well covered.
>
>Here's what I could find on Eclipse:
>http://help.eclipse.org/helios/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.jdt.doc.user
>%
>2Freference%2Fpreferences%2Fjava%2Fcodestyle%2Fref-preferences-organize-im
>p
>orts.htm
>
>On 7/1/12 11:26 PM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>There needs to be special configuration for devs to support these new
>>restrictions, if they are going to go in (-1 otherwise). And yes,
>>Eclipse will need to be supported automatically as well. As for
>>NetBeans... well, there may be some wiggle room there.
>>
>>
>>On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>>wrote:
>>> I think we can also just include the pre-configured files in the .idea/
>>> folder in the project root. I can find out how that works.
>>>
>>> On 7/1/12 11:20 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If IDE configurations should be provided, they can be available from
>>>>the
>>>>web page. For example, the section 'Generating Patches' in the home (
>>>>http://giraph.apache.org) would be good place.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Hyunsik Choi
>>>>
>>>>On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We
>>>>>should
>>>>> do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using
>>>>>Eclipse?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it
>>>>>will
>>>>>be
>>>>> >better if all coding convention is included in both IDE
>>>>>configurations.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >--
>>>>> >Hyunsik Choi
>>>>> >
>>>>> >On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our
>>>>>rules
>>>>> >> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can
>>>>>continue
>>>>>this
>>>>> >> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Avery
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our
>>>>> >>>diffs as
>>>>> >>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level
>>>>>of
>>>>> >>> uniformity.
>>>>> >>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>>>>> >>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>>>>> >>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports
>>>>>given
>>>>> >>>a
>>>>> >>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run
>>>>>checks
>>>>> >>>while
>>>>> >>> you're coding.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly
>>>>>don't
>>>>> >>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible
>>>>>with
>>>>> >>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add
>>>>>any
>>>>> >>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching
>>>>><ac...@apache.org>
>>>>> >>>>wrote:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle
>>>>>rules
>>>>> >>>>>for
>>>>> >>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<
>>>>> http://checkst
>>>>> >>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and
>>>>>(most
>>>>> >>>>> related to
>>>>> >>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Avery
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you.
>>>>>While
>>>>> >>>>>> doing
>>>>> >>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>>>> >>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports
>>>>>reordering
>>>>> >>>>>>every
>>>>> >>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good
>>>>>idea
>>>>>to
>>>>> >>>>>> come up
>>>>> >>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> org.*
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> com.*
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> javax.*
>>>>> >>>>>> java.*
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Alessandro
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>.
We already have other conventions in checkstyle.xml that the IDEs have to
be configured for (no star imports is one).
As for Eclipse, I meant: can someone contribute the settings for that?
I think with those two we should be pretty well covered.
Here's what I could find on Eclipse:
http://help.eclipse.org/helios/index.jsp?topic=%2Forg.eclipse.jdt.doc.user%
2Freference%2Fpreferences%2Fjava%2Fcodestyle%2Fref-preferences-organize-imp
orts.htm
On 7/1/12 11:26 PM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>There needs to be special configuration for devs to support these new
>restrictions, if they are going to go in (-1 otherwise). And yes,
>Eclipse will need to be supported automatically as well. As for
>NetBeans... well, there may be some wiggle room there.
>
>
>On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>wrote:
>> I think we can also just include the pre-configured files in the .idea/
>> folder in the project root. I can find out how that works.
>>
>> On 7/1/12 11:20 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>If IDE configurations should be provided, they can be available from the
>>>web page. For example, the section 'Generating Patches' in the home (
>>>http://giraph.apache.org) would be good place.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Hyunsik Choi
>>>
>>>On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We
>>>>should
>>>> do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using
>>>>Eclipse?
>>>>
>>>> On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it will
>>>>be
>>>> >better if all coding convention is included in both IDE
>>>>configurations.
>>>> >
>>>> >--
>>>> >Hyunsik Choi
>>>> >
>>>> >On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our
>>>>rules
>>>> >> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue
>>>>this
>>>> >> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Avery
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our
>>>> >>>diffs as
>>>> >>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level
>>>>of
>>>> >>> uniformity.
>>>> >>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>>>> >>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>>>> >>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports
>>>>given
>>>> >>>a
>>>> >>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run
>>>>checks
>>>> >>>while
>>>> >>> you're coding.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly
>>>>don't
>>>> >>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible
>>>>with
>>>> >>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add
>>>>any
>>>> >>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org>
>>>> >>>>wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle
>>>>rules
>>>> >>>>>for
>>>> >>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<
>>>> http://checkst
>>>> >>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and
>>>>(most
>>>> >>>>> related to
>>>> >>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Avery
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Hi all,
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you.
>>>>While
>>>> >>>>>> doing
>>>> >>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>>> >>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports
>>>>reordering
>>>> >>>>>>every
>>>> >>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good
>>>>idea
>>>>to
>>>> >>>>>> come up
>>>> >>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> org.*
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> com.*
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> javax.*
>>>> >>>>>> java.*
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Alessandro
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Jakob Homan <jg...@gmail.com>.
There needs to be special configuration for devs to support these new
restrictions, if they are going to go in (-1 otherwise). And yes,
Eclipse will need to be supported automatically as well. As for
NetBeans... well, there may be some wiggle room there.
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com> wrote:
> I think we can also just include the pre-configured files in the .idea/
> folder in the project root. I can find out how that works.
>
> On 7/1/12 11:20 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>If IDE configurations should be provided, they can be available from the
>>web page. For example, the section 'Generating Patches' in the home (
>>http://giraph.apache.org) would be good place.
>>
>>--
>>Hyunsik Choi
>>
>>On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We
>>>should
>>> do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using
>>>Eclipse?
>>>
>>> On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> >That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it will
>>>be
>>> >better if all coding convention is included in both IDE configurations.
>>> >
>>> >--
>>> >Hyunsik Choi
>>> >
>>> >On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our
>>>rules
>>> >> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue
>>>this
>>> >> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>>> >>
>>> >> Avery
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our
>>> >>>diffs as
>>> >>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
>>> >>> uniformity.
>>> >>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>>> >>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>>> >>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports
>>>given
>>> >>>a
>>> >>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks
>>> >>>while
>>> >>> you're coding.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly
>>>don't
>>> >>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible
>>>with
>>> >>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
>>> >>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org>
>>> >>>>wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle
>>>rules
>>> >>>>>for
>>> >>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<
>>> http://checkst
>>> >>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
>>> >>>>> related to
>>> >>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Any thoughts?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Avery
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Hi all,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you.
>>>While
>>> >>>>>> doing
>>> >>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>> >>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering
>>> >>>>>>every
>>> >>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea
>>>to
>>> >>>>>> come up
>>> >>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> org.*
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> com.*
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> javax.*
>>> >>>>>> java.*
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Alessandro
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>.
I think we can also just include the pre-configured files in the .idea/
folder in the project root. I can find out how that works.
On 7/1/12 11:20 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>If IDE configurations should be provided, they can be available from the
>web page. For example, the section 'Generating Patches' in the home (
>http://giraph.apache.org) would be good place.
>
>--
>Hyunsik Choi
>
>On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We
>>should
>> do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using
>>Eclipse?
>>
>> On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> >That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it will
>>be
>> >better if all coding convention is included in both IDE configurations.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Hyunsik Choi
>> >
>> >On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our
>>rules
>> >> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue
>>this
>> >> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>> >>
>> >> Avery
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our
>> >>>diffs as
>> >>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
>> >>> uniformity.
>> >>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>> >>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>> >>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports
>>given
>> >>>a
>> >>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks
>> >>>while
>> >>> you're coding.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly
>>don't
>> >>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible
>>with
>> >>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
>> >>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org>
>> >>>>wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle
>>rules
>> >>>>>for
>> >>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<
>> http://checkst
>> >>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
>> >>>>> related to
>> >>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Any thoughts?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Avery
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi all,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you.
>>While
>> >>>>>> doing
>> >>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>> >>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering
>> >>>>>>every
>> >>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea
>>to
>> >>>>>> come up
>> >>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> org.*
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> com.*
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> javax.*
>> >>>>>> java.*
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Alessandro
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Hyunsik Choi <hy...@apache.org>.
If IDE configurations should be provided, they can be available from the
web page. For example, the section 'Generating Patches' in the home (
http://giraph.apache.org) would be good place.
--
Hyunsik Choi
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com> wrote:
> I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We should
> do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using Eclipse?
>
> On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it will be
> >better if all coding convention is included in both IDE configurations.
> >
> >--
> >Hyunsik Choi
> >
> >On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our rules
> >> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue this
> >> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
> >>
> >> Avery
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our
> >>>diffs as
> >>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
> >>> uniformity.
> >>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
> >>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
> >>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports given
> >>>a
> >>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks
> >>>while
> >>> you're coding.
> >>>
> >>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly don't
> >>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible with
> >>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
> >>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org>
> >>>>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle rules
> >>>>>for
> >>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<
> http://checkst
> >>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
> >>>>> related to
> >>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Any thoughts?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Avery
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you. While
> >>>>>> doing
> >>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
> >>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering
> >>>>>>every
> >>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea to
> >>>>>> come up
> >>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> org.*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> com.*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> javax.*
> >>>>>> java.*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Alessandro
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Alessandro Presta <al...@fb.com>.
I don't think we currently have IDE configurations in the repo. We should
do that. I can see how that works for IntelliJ IDEA. Anyone using Eclipse?
On 7/1/12 11:06 PM, "Hyunsik Choi" <hy...@apache.org> wrote:
>That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it will be
>better if all coding convention is included in both IDE configurations.
>
>--
>Hyunsik Choi
>
>On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our rules
>> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue this
>> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>>
>> Avery
>>
>>
>> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our
>>>diffs as
>>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
>>> uniformity.
>>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports given
>>>a
>>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks
>>>while
>>> you're coding.
>>>
>>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly don't
>>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible with
>>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
>>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle rules
>>>>>for
>>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<http://checkst
>>>>>yle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>>>>>
>>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
>>>>> related to
>>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Avery
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you. While
>>>>>> doing
>>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering
>>>>>>every
>>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea to
>>>>>> come up
>>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> org.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> com.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> javax.*
>>>>>> java.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alessandro
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Hyunsik Choi <hy...@apache.org>.
That seems a great idea. In addition to the order of imports, it will be
better if all coding convention is included in both IDE configurations.
--
Hyunsik Choi
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our rules
> (as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue this
> discussion per GIRAPH-230.
>
> Avery
>
>
> On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>
>> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our diffs as
>> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
>> uniformity.
>> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
>> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
>> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports given a
>> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks while
>> you're coding.
>>
>> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly don't
>>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible with
>>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
>>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle rules for
>>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>>>
>>>> http://checkstyle.sourceforge.**net/config_imports.html<http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html>
>>>>
>>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
>>>> related to
>>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Avery
>>>>
>>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>>>
>>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you. While
>>>>> doing
>>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering every
>>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea to
>>>>> come up
>>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>>>
>>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>>>
>>>>> org.*
>>>>>
>>>>> com.*
>>>>>
>>>>> javax.*
>>>>> java.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alessandro
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>
Re: Order of imports
Posted by Avery Ching <av...@gmail.com>.
I think uniformity is good. I think as long as IDE's support our rules
(as Alessandro mentioned) this can only be better. We can continue this
discussion per GIRAPH-230.
Avery
On 7/1/12 8:35 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
> I think we should strive to make the signal-to-noise ratio of our diffs as
> high as possible, while at the same time enforce a certain level of
> uniformity.
> Besides, we already have a bunch of conventions for imports in
> checkstyle.xml, so this is straightforward.
> IDEA (and I'm pretty sure Eclipse too) can organize your imports given a
> set of rules, and there are also Checkstyle plugins that run checks while
> you're coding.
>
> On 6/30/12 6:43 AM, "Jakob Homan" <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My thought is that after reviewing a lot of patches, I honestly don't
>> care about the imports... If your IDE can do something sensible with
>> them, that's great. But they have no effect on the code or add any
>> extra effort to the code reviews.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Avery Ching <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> It's not silly at all. I suggest that we add some checkstyle rules for
>>> enforcing our convention as well.
>>>
>>> http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/config_imports.html
>>>
>>> I like AvoidStarImport, RedundantImport, UnusedImports, and (most
>>> related to
>>> this question) ImportOrder.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?
>>>
>>> Avery
>>>
>>> On 6/29/12 8:23 AM, Alessandro Presta wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Kind of a silly concern, but nevertheless:
>>>>
>>>> IntelliJ IDEA does a great job at optimizing imports for you. While
>>>> doing
>>>> so, it also insists in reorganizing them following some logic.
>>>> Since it's not nice to have a patch dirtied by imports reordering every
>>>> time a different person touches a class, it could be a good idea to
>>>> come up
>>>> with a convention and configure our IDEs accordingly.
>>>>
>>>> Example (blank lines matter):
>>>>
>>>> org.apache.giraph.*
>>>>
>>>> org.*
>>>>
>>>> com.*
>>>>
>>>> javax.*
>>>> java.*
>>>>
>>>> Or any variation you prefer.
>>>>
>>>> If there is agreement we can update the code conventions.
>>>>
>>>> Alessandro
>>>>