[SCXML][ALL] Thoughts on checkstyle report

[Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com>]

After attending to most of the qualms checkstyle had with the SCXML
code base, the remaining cruft is posted here [
http://people.apache.org/~rahul/scxml/checkstyle-report.html ] *time
sensitive URL*

The vast majority falls in three categories:

1) Missing header / line does not match expected header - Which my
eyes style out of the checkstyle report ;-)

2) 'foo' hides a field - Inside side-effect free setters, where these
reports come from, this does not bother me.

3) Method 'bar' not designed for extension - Outside the SCXML Java
object model (where the type hierarchies imply certain semantics of
execution for the state machine), I haven't chased these down.

Thoughts, anyone?

-Rahul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: [SCXML][ALL] Thoughts on checkstyle report

[Joerg Hohwiller <jo...@j-hohwiller.de>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> [snip]
> 
>>3) Method 'bar' not designed for extension - Outside the SCXML Java
>>object model (where the type hierarchies imply certain semantics of
>>execution for the state machine), I haven't chased these down.
> 
> 
> I'd be tempted to disable this one, since I don't really agree with
> what it's complaining about anyway.
I agree 100% with what you are saying:
This check is completely brain-damaged!
> 
> --
> Martin Cooper
Jörg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDC3vmmPuec2Dcv/8RAjv+AJ0R06qGT5dwcMfDiLXGW4b8TW+CuwCfXFzH
tjhk6fxiHhzNHxojnbC1m4c=
=kIXX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: [SCXML][ALL] Thoughts on checkstyle report

[Martin Cooper <mf...@gmail.com>]

On 8/23/05, Rahul Akolkar <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> After attending to most of the qualms checkstyle had with the SCXML
> code base, the remaining cruft is posted here [
> http://people.apache.org/~rahul/scxml/checkstyle-report.html ] *time
> sensitive URL*
> 
> The vast majority falls in three categories:
> 
> 1) Missing header / line does not match expected header - Which my
> eyes style out of the checkstyle report ;-)

These should be fixed, so that we can be sure that all source files
include the Apache License at the top. All that needs to happen is
that Checkstyle be pointed to an appropriate header template
containing the Apache License (in regexp form, in order to handle the
changing copyright years).

> 2) 'foo' hides a field - Inside side-effect free setters, where these
> reports come from, this does not bother me.

I'd disable this one. It can occasionally find a real bug, but when
the coding style is to use the same name for parameters and members,
it's just a pain.

> 3) Method 'bar' not designed for extension - Outside the SCXML Java
> object model (where the type hierarchies imply certain semantics of
> execution for the state machine), I haven't chased these down.

I'd be tempted to disable this one, since I don't really agree with
what it's complaining about anyway.

--
Martin Cooper


> Thoughts, anyone?
> 
> -Rahul
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org