You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ignite.apache.org by Dmitriy Govorukhin <dm...@gmail.com> on 2018/05/03 08:30:57 UTC
method arguments code style
Hi folks,
I read https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines,
but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
In many places in the code, I see different code style, this creates
difficulties for reading.
It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
```java
public void foo(Object obj1,
Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
....
}
```
An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
```java
private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg, boolean sql,
Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
```
I suggest two options for writing arguments.
If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
```java
public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... , Object objN){
....
}
```
If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page delimiter.
```java
public void foo(
Object obj1,
Object obj2,
Object obj3,
... ,
Object objN
){
....
}
```
In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to merge if
method arguments were changed.
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>.
Hi Vyacheslav,
Can we proceed with plugin publishing? I have not seen any objections, so I
propose to complete this task.
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 21:47, Vyacheslav Daradur <da...@gmail.com>:
> Hi, Igniters!
>
> After the completion of publishing abbr-plugin [1][2] we will be able
> to automate checking of method arguments code style.
>
> It will be easy to check rules approved by the community during writing
> code.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5698
> [2]
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/abbrevation-rules-plugin-td19356.html
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Folks, I've messed with another topic, where Vladimir was going to update
> > review check-list.
> >
> > Here I've updated Coding Guidelines:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines#CodingGuidelines-MethodArguments
> >
> > Please review changes, so we can consider it is final.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 20:05, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> I thought that Vladimir will update.
> >>
> >> By the way, Denis M, I propose to grant access to the wiki to Dmitry G.
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> >> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 19:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> Dmitriy,
> >>>
> >>> Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the
> >>> results of the discussion?
> >>> On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Dmitry,
> >>> > Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others
> >>> don't
> >>> > looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
> >>> > arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second
> when
> >>> all
> >>> > every arguments is on a separate line.
> >>> > Mixed style should be disallowed.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >>> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Vladimir,
> >>> > > My eyes cry when I see this
> >>> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
> filters,
> >>> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> >>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
> >>> > > getRowCountApproximation(),
> >>> > > columns) / 10;
> >>> > > }
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
> >>> > > It is much better readable for me
> >>> > > public double getCost(
> >>> > > Session ses,
> >>> > > int[] masks,
> >>> > > TableFilter[] filters,
> >>> > > int filter,
> >>> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > HashSet<Column> cols
> >>> > > ) {
> >>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> >>> > > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
> >>> > > columns) / 10;
> >>> > > }
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> vozerov@gridgain.com
> >>> >
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce
> any
> >>> of
> >>> > > them.
> >>> > > > I hardly can say that this
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > public double getCost(
> >>> > > > Session ses,
> >>> > > > int[] masks,
> >>> > > > TableFilter[] filters,
> >>> > > > int filter,
> >>> > > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols
> >>> > > > ) {
> >>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> >>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> >>> > > > }
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > is better than this
> >>> > > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
> >>> filters,
> >>> > > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> >>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> >>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> >>> > > > }
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > But this
> >>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
> >>> > > > GridCacheVersion ver,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
> >>> > > > )
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > looks better than this
> >>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either
> >>> move
> >>> > > them
> >>> > > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code
> >>> style you
> >>> > > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not
> >>> aligned
> >>> > > > (example 1).
> >>> > > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for
> us.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Vladimir.
> >>> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
> >>> > > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Alexey,
> >>> > > > > +1.
> >>> > > > > I personally also follow this style.
> >>> > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> >>> > > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for
> >>> quite a
> >>> > > > while.
> >>> > > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we
> >>> should
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > allow
> >>> > > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws
> clause)
> >>> fits
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > the
> >>> > > > > > line.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Thoughts?
> >>> > > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <
> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> >>> >:
> >>> > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> >>> > > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> >>> > > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to
> >>> understand.
> >>> > > > > > > Sincerely,
> >>> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >>> > > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > > > > :
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Hi folks,
> >>> > > > > > > > I read
> >>> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Coding+Guidelines
> >>> > > > > ,
> >>> > > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method
> >>> arguments.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style,
> this
> >>> > > > creates
> >>> > > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to
> >>> perceive.
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> >>> > > > > > > > ....
> >>> > > > > > > > }
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > boolean
> >>> > > > > > > sql,
> >>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> >>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page
> delimiter.
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 ,
> ...
> >>> ,
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Object
> >>> > > > > > > objN){
> >>> > > > > > > > ....
> >>> > > > > > > > }
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the
> page
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > delimiter.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj1,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj2,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj3,
> >>> > > > > > > > ... ,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object objN
> >>> > > > > > > > ){
> >>> > > > > > > > ....
> >>> > > > > > > > }
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much
> easier
> >>> to
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > merge
> >>> > > > > if
> >>> > > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Vyacheslav Daradur <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi, I filed the ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8512
I'll do this when I have enough time if it won't be done earlier.
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 8:46 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Vyacheslav,
>
> plugin was published in AI wiki, feel free to create ticket to add method
> code style check.
>
> Actually I'm not sure it is easy to validate code style in plugin, but I
> guess you know it better.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 21:47, Vyacheslav Daradur <da...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi, Igniters!
>>
>> After the completion of publishing abbr-plugin [1][2] we will be able
>> to automate checking of method arguments code style.
>>
>> It will be easy to check rules approved by the community during writing
>> code.
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5698
>> [2]
>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/abbrevation-rules-plugin-td19356.html
>>
>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Folks, I've messed with another topic, where Vladimir was going to update
>> > review check-list.
>> >
>> > Here I've updated Coding Guidelines:
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines#CodingGuidelines-MethodArguments
>> >
>> > Please review changes, so we can consider it is final.
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> > Dmitriy Pavlov
>> >
>> > вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 20:05, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> I thought that Vladimir will update.
>> >>
>> >> By the way, Denis M, I propose to grant access to the wiki to Dmitry G.
>> >> WDYT?
>> >>
>> >> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 19:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>> >> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >>> Dmitriy,
>> >>>
>> >>> Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the
>> >>> results of the discussion?
>> >>> On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Dmitry,
>> >>> > Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others
>> >>> don't
>> >>> > looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
>> >>> > arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second
>> when
>> >>> all
>> >>> > every arguments is on a separate line.
>> >>> > Mixed style should be disallowed.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>> >>> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > Vladimir,
>> >>> > > My eyes cry when I see this
>> >>> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
>> filters,
>> >>> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
>> >>> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
>> >>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
>> >>> > > getRowCountApproximation(),
>> >>> > > columns) / 10;
>> >>> > > }
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
>> >>> > > It is much better readable for me
>> >>> > > public double getCost(
>> >>> > > Session ses,
>> >>> > > int[] masks,
>> >>> > > TableFilter[] filters,
>> >>> > > int filter,
>> >>> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
>> >>> > > HashSet<Column> cols
>> >>> > > ) {
>> >>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>> >>> > > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
>> >>> > > columns) / 10;
>> >>> > > }
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <
>> vozerov@gridgain.com
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce
>> any
>> >>> of
>> >>> > > them.
>> >>> > > > I hardly can say that this
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > public double getCost(
>> >>> > > > Session ses,
>> >>> > > > int[] masks,
>> >>> > > > TableFilter[] filters,
>> >>> > > > int filter,
>> >>> > > > SortOrder sortOrder,
>> >>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols
>> >>> > > > ) {
>> >>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>> >>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
>> >>> > > > }
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > is better than this
>> >>> > > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
>> >>> filters,
>> >>> > > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
>> >>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
>> >>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>> >>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
>> >>> > > > }
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > But this
>> >>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
>> >>> > > > GridCacheVersion ver,
>> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
>> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
>> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
>> >>> > > > )
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > looks better than this
>> >>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
>> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
>> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
>> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either
>> >>> move
>> >>> > > them
>> >>> > > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code
>> >>> style you
>> >>> > > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not
>> >>> aligned
>> >>> > > > (example 1).
>> >>> > > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for
>> us.
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > Vladimir.
>> >>> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
>> >>> > > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > > Alexey,
>> >>> > > > > +1.
>> >>> > > > > I personally also follow this style.
>> >>> > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
>> >>> > > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for
>> >>> quite a
>> >>> > > > while.
>> >>> > > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we
>> >>> should
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > allow
>> >>> > > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws
>> clause)
>> >>> fits
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > the
>> >>> > > > > > line.
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > Thoughts?
>> >>> > > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <
>> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>> >>> >:
>> >>> > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
>> >>> > > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
>> >>> > > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to
>> >>> understand.
>> >>> > > > > > > Sincerely,
>> >>> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>> >>> > > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
>> >>> > > > > > > > :
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > > Hi folks,
>> >>> > > > > > > > I read
>> >>> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > Coding+Guidelines
>> >>> > > > > ,
>> >>> > > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method
>> >>> arguments.
>> >>> > > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style,
>> this
>> >>> > > > creates
>> >>> > > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
>> >>> > > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to
>> >>> perceive.
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
>> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
>> >>> > > > > > > > ....
>> >>> > > > > > > > }
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```
>> >>> > > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
>> >>> > > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> >>> > > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > boolean
>> >>> > > > > > > sql,
>> >>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
>> >>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```
>> >>> > > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
>> >>> > > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page
>> delimiter.
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 ,
>> ...
>> >>> ,
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > Object
>> >>> > > > > > > objN){
>> >>> > > > > > > > ....
>> >>> > > > > > > > }
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```
>> >>> > > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the
>> page
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > delimiter.
>> >>> > > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(
>> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj1,
>> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj2,
>> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj3,
>> >>> > > > > > > > ... ,
>> >>> > > > > > > > Object objN
>> >>> > > > > > > > ){
>> >>> > > > > > > > ....
>> >>> > > > > > > > }
>> >>> > > > > > > > ```
>> >>> > > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much
>> easier
>> >>> to
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > merge
>> >>> > > > > if
>> >>> > > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
>> >>> > > > > > >
>> >>> > > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>>
--
Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>.
Hi Vyacheslav,
plugin was published in AI wiki, feel free to create ticket to add method
code style check.
Actually I'm not sure it is easy to validate code style in plugin, but I
guess you know it better.
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 21:47, Vyacheslav Daradur <da...@gmail.com>:
> Hi, Igniters!
>
> After the completion of publishing abbr-plugin [1][2] we will be able
> to automate checking of method arguments code style.
>
> It will be easy to check rules approved by the community during writing
> code.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5698
> [2]
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/abbrevation-rules-plugin-td19356.html
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Folks, I've messed with another topic, where Vladimir was going to update
> > review check-list.
> >
> > Here I've updated Coding Guidelines:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines#CodingGuidelines-MethodArguments
> >
> > Please review changes, so we can consider it is final.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 20:05, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> I thought that Vladimir will update.
> >>
> >> By the way, Denis M, I propose to grant access to the wiki to Dmitry G.
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> >> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 19:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> Dmitriy,
> >>>
> >>> Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the
> >>> results of the discussion?
> >>> On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Dmitry,
> >>> > Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others
> >>> don't
> >>> > looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
> >>> > arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second
> when
> >>> all
> >>> > every arguments is on a separate line.
> >>> > Mixed style should be disallowed.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >>> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Vladimir,
> >>> > > My eyes cry when I see this
> >>> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
> filters,
> >>> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> >>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
> >>> > > getRowCountApproximation(),
> >>> > > columns) / 10;
> >>> > > }
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
> >>> > > It is much better readable for me
> >>> > > public double getCost(
> >>> > > Session ses,
> >>> > > int[] masks,
> >>> > > TableFilter[] filters,
> >>> > > int filter,
> >>> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > HashSet<Column> cols
> >>> > > ) {
> >>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> >>> > > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
> >>> > > columns) / 10;
> >>> > > }
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> vozerov@gridgain.com
> >>> >
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce
> any
> >>> of
> >>> > > them.
> >>> > > > I hardly can say that this
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > public double getCost(
> >>> > > > Session ses,
> >>> > > > int[] masks,
> >>> > > > TableFilter[] filters,
> >>> > > > int filter,
> >>> > > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols
> >>> > > > ) {
> >>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> >>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> >>> > > > }
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > is better than this
> >>> > > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
> >>> filters,
> >>> > > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> >>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> >>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> >>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> >>> > > > }
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > But this
> >>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
> >>> > > > GridCacheVersion ver,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
> >>> > > > )
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > looks better than this
> >>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> >>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either
> >>> move
> >>> > > them
> >>> > > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code
> >>> style you
> >>> > > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not
> >>> aligned
> >>> > > > (example 1).
> >>> > > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for
> us.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Vladimir.
> >>> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
> >>> > > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Alexey,
> >>> > > > > +1.
> >>> > > > > I personally also follow this style.
> >>> > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> >>> > > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for
> >>> quite a
> >>> > > > while.
> >>> > > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we
> >>> should
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > allow
> >>> > > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws
> clause)
> >>> fits
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > the
> >>> > > > > > line.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Thoughts?
> >>> > > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <
> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> >>> >:
> >>> > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> >>> > > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> >>> > > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to
> >>> understand.
> >>> > > > > > > Sincerely,
> >>> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >>> > > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > > > > :
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > Hi folks,
> >>> > > > > > > > I read
> >>> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Coding+Guidelines
> >>> > > > > ,
> >>> > > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method
> >>> arguments.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style,
> this
> >>> > > > creates
> >>> > > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to
> >>> perceive.
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> >>> > > > > > > > ....
> >>> > > > > > > > }
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > boolean
> >>> > > > > > > sql,
> >>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> >>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page
> delimiter.
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 ,
> ...
> >>> ,
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Object
> >>> > > > > > > objN){
> >>> > > > > > > > ....
> >>> > > > > > > > }
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the
> page
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > delimiter.
> >>> > > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > > ```java
> >>> > > > > > > > public void foo(
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj1,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj2,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object obj3,
> >>> > > > > > > > ... ,
> >>> > > > > > > > Object objN
> >>> > > > > > > > ){
> >>> > > > > > > > ....
> >>> > > > > > > > }
> >>> > > > > > > > ```
> >>> > > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much
> easier
> >>> to
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > merge
> >>> > > > > if
> >>> > > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Vyacheslav Daradur <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Igniters!
After the completion of publishing abbr-plugin [1][2] we will be able
to automate checking of method arguments code style.
It will be easy to check rules approved by the community during writing code.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5698
[2] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/abbrevation-rules-plugin-td19356.html
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Folks, I've messed with another topic, where Vladimir was going to update
> review check-list.
>
> Here I've updated Coding Guidelines:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines#CodingGuidelines-MethodArguments
>
> Please review changes, so we can consider it is final.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 20:05, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
>
>> I thought that Vladimir will update.
>>
>> By the way, Denis M, I propose to grant access to the wiki to Dmitry G.
>> WDYT?
>>
>> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 19:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Dmitriy,
>>>
>>> Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the
>>> results of the discussion?
>>> On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Dmitry,
>>> > Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others
>>> don't
>>> > looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
>>> > arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second when
>>> all
>>> > every arguments is on a separate line.
>>> > Mixed style should be disallowed.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>>> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Vladimir,
>>> > > My eyes cry when I see this
>>> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
>>> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
>>> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
>>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
>>> > > getRowCountApproximation(),
>>> > > columns) / 10;
>>> > > }
>>> > >
>>> > > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
>>> > > It is much better readable for me
>>> > > public double getCost(
>>> > > Session ses,
>>> > > int[] masks,
>>> > > TableFilter[] filters,
>>> > > int filter,
>>> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
>>> > > HashSet<Column> cols
>>> > > ) {
>>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>>> > > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
>>> > > columns) / 10;
>>> > > }
>>> > >
>>> > > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com
>>> >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any
>>> of
>>> > > them.
>>> > > > I hardly can say that this
>>> > > >
>>> > > > public double getCost(
>>> > > > Session ses,
>>> > > > int[] masks,
>>> > > > TableFilter[] filters,
>>> > > > int filter,
>>> > > > SortOrder sortOrder,
>>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols
>>> > > > ) {
>>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
>>> > > > }
>>> > > >
>>> > > > is better than this
>>> > > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
>>> filters,
>>> > > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
>>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
>>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
>>> > > > }
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > But this
>>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
>>> > > > GridCacheVersion ver,
>>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
>>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
>>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
>>> > > > )
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > looks better than this
>>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
>>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
>>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
>>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either
>>> move
>>> > > them
>>> > > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code
>>> style you
>>> > > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not
>>> aligned
>>> > > > (example 1).
>>> > > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Vladimir.
>>> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
>>> > > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Alexey,
>>> > > > > +1.
>>> > > > > I personally also follow this style.
>>> > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
>>> > > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for
>>> quite a
>>> > > > while.
>>> > > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we
>>> should
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > allow
>>> > > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause)
>>> fits
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > the
>>> > > > > > line.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Thoughts?
>>> > > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>> >:
>>> > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
>>> > > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
>>> > > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to
>>> understand.
>>> > > > > > > Sincerely,
>>> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>>> > > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
>>> > > > > > > > :
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > Hi folks,
>>> > > > > > > > I read
>>> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Coding+Guidelines
>>> > > > > ,
>>> > > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method
>>> arguments.
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this
>>> > > > creates
>>> > > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to
>>> perceive.
>>> > > > > > > > ```java
>>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
>>> > > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
>>> > > > > > > > ....
>>> > > > > > > > }
>>> > > > > > > > ```
>>> > > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > ```java
>>> > > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > boolean
>>> > > > > > > sql,
>>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
>>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
>>> > > > > > > > ```
>>> > > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
>>> > > > > > > > ```java
>>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ...
>>> ,
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Object
>>> > > > > > > objN){
>>> > > > > > > > ....
>>> > > > > > > > }
>>> > > > > > > > ```
>>> > > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > delimiter.
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > ```java
>>> > > > > > > > public void foo(
>>> > > > > > > > Object obj1,
>>> > > > > > > > Object obj2,
>>> > > > > > > > Object obj3,
>>> > > > > > > > ... ,
>>> > > > > > > > Object objN
>>> > > > > > > > ){
>>> > > > > > > > ....
>>> > > > > > > > }
>>> > > > > > > > ```
>>> > > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier
>>> to
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > > merge
>>> > > > > if
>>> > > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
--
Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>.
Folks, I've messed with another topic, where Vladimir was going to update
review check-list.
Here I've updated Coding Guidelines:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines#CodingGuidelines-MethodArguments
Please review changes, so we can consider it is final.
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 20:05, Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> I thought that Vladimir will update.
>
> By the way, Denis M, I propose to grant access to the wiki to Dmitry G.
> WDYT?
>
> вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 19:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>:
>
>> Dmitriy,
>>
>> Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the
>> results of the discussion?
>> On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Dmitry,
>> > Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others
>> don't
>> > looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
>> > arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second when
>> all
>> > every arguments is on a separate line.
>> > Mixed style should be disallowed.
>> >
>> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Vladimir,
>> > > My eyes cry when I see this
>> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
>> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
>> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
>> > > getRowCountApproximation(),
>> > > columns) / 10;
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
>> > > It is much better readable for me
>> > > public double getCost(
>> > > Session ses,
>> > > int[] masks,
>> > > TableFilter[] filters,
>> > > int filter,
>> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
>> > > HashSet<Column> cols
>> > > ) {
>> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>> > > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
>> > > columns) / 10;
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any
>> of
>> > > them.
>> > > > I hardly can say that this
>> > > >
>> > > > public double getCost(
>> > > > Session ses,
>> > > > int[] masks,
>> > > > TableFilter[] filters,
>> > > > int filter,
>> > > > SortOrder sortOrder,
>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols
>> > > > ) {
>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
>> > > > }
>> > > >
>> > > > is better than this
>> > > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
>> filters,
>> > > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
>> > > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
>> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
>> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
>> > > > }
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > But this
>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
>> > > > GridCacheVersion ver,
>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
>> > > > )
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > looks better than this
>> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
>> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either
>> move
>> > > them
>> > > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code
>> style you
>> > > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not
>> aligned
>> > > > (example 1).
>> > > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
>> > > >
>> > > > Vladimir.
>> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
>> > > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Alexey,
>> > > > > +1.
>> > > > > I personally also follow this style.
>> > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
>> > > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for
>> quite a
>> > > > while.
>> > > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we
>> should
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > allow
>> > > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause)
>> fits
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > the
>> > > > > > line.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Thoughts?
>> > > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>> >:
>> > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
>> > > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
>> > > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to
>> understand.
>> > > > > > > Sincerely,
>> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>> > > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
>> > > > > > > > :
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hi folks,
>> > > > > > > > I read
>> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Coding+Guidelines
>> > > > > ,
>> > > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method
>> arguments.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this
>> > > > creates
>> > > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to
>> perceive.
>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
>> > > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
>> > > > > > > > ....
>> > > > > > > > }
>> > > > > > > > ```
>> > > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> > > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > boolean
>> > > > > > > sql,
>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
>> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
>> > > > > > > > ```
>> > > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ...
>> ,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Object
>> > > > > > > objN){
>> > > > > > > > ....
>> > > > > > > > }
>> > > > > > > > ```
>> > > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > delimiter.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > ```java
>> > > > > > > > public void foo(
>> > > > > > > > Object obj1,
>> > > > > > > > Object obj2,
>> > > > > > > > Object obj3,
>> > > > > > > > ... ,
>> > > > > > > > Object objN
>> > > > > > > > ){
>> > > > > > > > ....
>> > > > > > > > }
>> > > > > > > > ```
>> > > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier
>> to
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > merge
>> > > > > if
>> > > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>.
I thought that Vladimir will update.
By the way, Denis M, I propose to grant access to the wiki to Dmitry G.
WDYT?
вт, 8 мая 2018 г. в 19:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
>:
> Dmitriy,
>
> Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the
> results of the discussion?
> On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dmitry,
> > Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others
> don't
> > looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
> > arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second when
> all
> > every arguments is on a separate line.
> > Mixed style should be disallowed.
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Vladimir,
> > > My eyes cry when I see this
> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
> > > getRowCountApproximation(),
> > > columns) / 10;
> > > }
> > >
> > > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
> > > It is much better readable for me
> > > public double getCost(
> > > Session ses,
> > > int[] masks,
> > > TableFilter[] filters,
> > > int filter,
> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> > > HashSet<Column> cols
> > > ) {
> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
> > > columns) / 10;
> > > }
> > >
> > > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any of
> > > them.
> > > > I hardly can say that this
> > > >
> > > > public double getCost(
> > > > Session ses,
> > > > int[] masks,
> > > > TableFilter[] filters,
> > > > int filter,
> > > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> > > > HashSet<Column> cols
> > > > ) {
> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > is better than this
> > > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[]
> filters,
> > > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> > > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> > > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > But this
> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
> > > > GridCacheVersion ver,
> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
> > > > )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > looks better than this
> > > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> > > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either
> move
> > > them
> > > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code
> style you
> > > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not
> aligned
> > > > (example 1).
> > > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
> > > >
> > > > Vladimir.
> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
> > > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Alexey,
> > > > > +1.
> > > > > I personally also follow this style.
> > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite
> a
> > > > while.
> > > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we
> should
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > allow
> > > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause)
> fits
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > the
> > > > > > line.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> >:
> > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> > > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to
> understand.
> > > > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > > > > > I read
> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Coding+Guidelines
> > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method
> arguments.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this
> > > > creates
> > > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to
> perceive.
> > > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > > > > > > > ....
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > boolean
> > > > > > > sql,
> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> > > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... ,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Object
> > > > > > > objN){
> > > > > > > > ....
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > delimiter.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > > public void foo(
> > > > > > > > Object obj1,
> > > > > > > > Object obj2,
> > > > > > > > Object obj3,
> > > > > > > > ... ,
> > > > > > > > Object objN
> > > > > > > > ){
> > > > > > > > ....
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > merge
> > > > > if
> > > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitriy Govorukhin <dm...@gmail.com>.
Dmitriy,
Сould you please update code style wiki page in accordance with the results of the discussion?
On May 7 2018, at 11:00 am, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com> wrote:
>
> Dmitry,
> Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others don't
> looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
> arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second when all
> every arguments is on a separate line.
> Mixed style should be disallowed.
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Vladimir,
> > My eyes cry when I see this
> > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
> > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
> > getRowCountApproximation(),
> > columns) / 10;
> > }
> >
> > Why did arguments split into 3 line?
> > It is much better readable for me
> > public double getCost(
> > Session ses,
> > int[] masks,
> > TableFilter[] filters,
> > int filter,
> > SortOrder sortOrder,
> > HashSet<Column> cols
> > ) {
> > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > able.getRowCountApproximation(),
> > columns) / 10;
> > }
> >
> > Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any of
> > them.
> > > I hardly can say that this
> > >
> > > public double getCost(
> > > Session ses,
> > > int[] masks,
> > > TableFilter[] filters,
> > > int filter,
> > > SortOrder sortOrder,
> > > HashSet<Column> cols
> > > ) {
> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> > > }
> > >
> > > is better than this
> > > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
> > > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> > > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> > > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > But this
> > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
> > > GridCacheVersion ver,
> > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
> > > )
> > >
> > >
> > > looks better than this
> > > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
> > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> > > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
> > >
> > >
> > > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either move
> > them
> > > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code style you
> > > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not aligned
> > > (example 1).
> > > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
> > >
> > > Vladimir.
> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
> > > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Alexey,
> > > > +1.
> > > > I personally also follow this style.
> > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a
> > > while.
> > > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should
> > > >
> > >
> > > allow
> > > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause) fits
> > > >
> > >
> > > the
> > > > > line.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> > > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
> > > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > > >
> > > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> > > > > > > :
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > > > > I read
> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Coding+Guidelines
> > > > ,
> > > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this
> > > creates
> > > > > > > difficulties for reading.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
> > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > > > > > > ....
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > boolean
> > > > > > sql,
> > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... ,
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Object
> > > > > > objN){
> > > > > > > ....
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > delimiter.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > > public void foo(
> > > > > > > Object obj1,
> > > > > > > Object obj2,
> > > > > > > Object obj3,
> > > > > > > ... ,
> > > > > > > Object objN
> > > > > > > ){
> > > > > > > ....
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > ```
> > > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > merge
> > > > if
> > > > > > > method arguments were changed.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>.
Dmitry,
Agree, mixed style when some arguments share the same line and others don't
looks very bad. My proposal was to allow two styles - first when all
arguments are on the same line splitted by 120 char limit, second when all
every arguments is on a separate line.
Mixed style should be disallowed.
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Vladimir,
>
> My eyes cry when I see this
>
> public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
> int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> HashSet<Column> cols) {
> return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.
> getRowCountApproximation(),
> columns) / 10;
> }
>
> Why did arguments split into 3 line?
>
> It is much better readable for me
>
> public double getCost(
> Session ses,
> int[] masks,
> TableFilter[] filters,
> int filter,
> SortOrder sortOrder,
> HashSet<Column> cols
> ) {
> return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> able.getRowCountApproximation(),
> columns) / 10;
> }
>
> Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
>
> > My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any of
> them.
> > I hardly can say that this
> >
> > public double getCost(
> > Session ses,
> > int[] masks,
> > TableFilter[] filters,
> > int filter,
> > SortOrder sortOrder,
> > HashSet<Column> cols
> > ) {
> > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> > }
> >
> > is better than this
> >
> > public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
> > int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> > HashSet<Column> cols) {
> > return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> > table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> > }
> >
> >
> > But this
> >
> > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
> > GridCacheVersion ver,
> > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
> > )
> >
> >
> > looks better than this
> >
> > public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
> > Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> > Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> > Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
> >
> >
> > The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either move
> them
> > horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code style you
> > have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not aligned
> > (example 1).
> > Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
> >
> > Vladimir.
> >
> > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
> > eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Alexey,
> > >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > I personally also follow this style.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a
> > while.
> > > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should
> > allow
> > > > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause) fits
> > the
> > > > line.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > > > >
> > > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > >
> > > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I read
> > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > Coding+Guidelines
> > > ,
> > > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this
> > creates
> > > > > > difficulties for reading.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > > > > > ....
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > ```
> > > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> > > boolean
> > > > > sql,
> > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > > > > > ```
> > > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... ,
> > Object
> > > > > objN){
> > > > > > ....
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > ```
> > > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
> > > delimiter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ```java
> > > > > > public void foo(
> > > > > > Object obj1,
> > > > > > Object obj2,
> > > > > > Object obj3,
> > > > > > ... ,
> > > > > > Object objN
> > > > > > ){
> > > > > > ....
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > ```
> > > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to
> merge
> > > if
> > > > > > method arguments were changed.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitriy Govorukhin <dm...@gmail.com>.
Vladimir,
My eyes cry when I see this
public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
HashSet<Column> cols) {
return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,table.getRowCountApproximation(),
columns) / 10;
}
Why did arguments split into 3 line?
It is much better readable for me
public double getCost(
Session ses,
int[] masks,
TableFilter[] filters,
int filter,
SortOrder sortOrder,
HashSet<Column> cols
) {
return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
able.getRowCountApproximation(),
columns) / 10;
}
Do we have a serious reason to continue writing code as before?
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>
wrote:
> My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any of them.
> I hardly can say that this
>
> public double getCost(
> Session ses,
> int[] masks,
> TableFilter[] filters,
> int filter,
> SortOrder sortOrder,
> HashSet<Column> cols
> ) {
> return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> }
>
> is better than this
>
> public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
> int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
> HashSet<Column> cols) {
> return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
> table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
> }
>
>
> But this
>
> public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
> GridCacheVersion ver,
> Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
> )
>
>
> looks better than this
>
> public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
> Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
> Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
> Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
>
>
> The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either move them
> horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code style you
> have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not aligned
> (example 1).
> Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
>
> Vladimir.
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
> eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Alexey,
> >
> > +1.
> >
> > I personally also follow this style.
> >
> > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a
> while.
> > > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should
> allow
> > > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause) fits
> the
> > > line.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > > >
> > > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> > > >
> > > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >
> > > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > I read
> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> Coding+Guidelines
> > ,
> > > > > but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
> > > > >
> > > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this
> creates
> > > > > difficulties for reading.
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
> > > > >
> > > > > ```java
> > > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > > > > ....
> > > > > }
> > > > > ```
> > > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> > > > >
> > > > > ```java
> > > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> > boolean
> > > > sql,
> > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > > > > ```
> > > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> > > > >
> > > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> > > > >
> > > > > ```java
> > > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... ,
> Object
> > > > objN){
> > > > > ....
> > > > > }
> > > > > ```
> > > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
> > delimiter.
> > > > >
> > > > > ```java
> > > > > public void foo(
> > > > > Object obj1,
> > > > > Object obj2,
> > > > > Object obj3,
> > > > > ... ,
> > > > > Object objN
> > > > > ){
> > > > > ....
> > > > > }
> > > > > ```
> > > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to merge
> > if
> > > > > method arguments were changed.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Vladimir Ozerov <vo...@gridgain.com>.
My opinion is that we should allow both styles and not enforce any of them.
I hardly can say that this
public double getCost(
Session ses,
int[] masks,
TableFilter[] filters,
int filter,
SortOrder sortOrder,
HashSet<Column> cols
) {
return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
}
is better than this
public double getCost(Session ses, int[] masks, TableFilter[] filters,
int filter, SortOrder sortOrder,
HashSet<Column> cols) {
return SpatialTreeIndex.getCostRangeIndex(masks,
table.getRowCountApproximation(), columns) / 10;
}
But this
public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(
GridCacheVersion ver,
Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback
)
looks better than this
public CacheLockCandidates doneRemote(GridCacheVersion ver,
Collection<GridCacheVersion> pending,
Collection<GridCacheVersion> committed,
Collection<GridCacheVersion> rolledback)
The very problem is that our eyes feel comfortable when we either move them
horizontally, or vertically (example 2). But with proposed code style you
have to do zigzag movements in general case because lines are not aligned
(example 1).
Merge conflicts on multiliners are hardly of major concern for us.
Vladimir.
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev <
eduard.shangareev@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alexey,
>
> +1.
>
> I personally also follow this style.
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a while.
> > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should allow
> > the old style when the method signature (without throws clause) fits the
> > line.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > >
> > > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> > >
> > > I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > Hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > I read
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines
> ,
> > > > but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
> > > >
> > > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this creates
> > > > difficulties for reading.
> > > >
> > > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
> > > >
> > > > ```java
> > > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > > > ....
> > > > }
> > > > ```
> > > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> > > >
> > > > ```java
> > > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg,
> boolean
> > > sql,
> > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > > > ```
> > > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> > > >
> > > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> > > >
> > > > ```java
> > > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... , Object
> > > objN){
> > > > ....
> > > > }
> > > > ```
> > > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page
> delimiter.
> > > >
> > > > ```java
> > > > public void foo(
> > > > Object obj1,
> > > > Object obj2,
> > > > Object obj3,
> > > > ... ,
> > > > Object objN
> > > > ){
> > > > ....
> > > > }
> > > > ```
> > > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to merge
> if
> > > > method arguments were changed.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Eduard Shangareev <ed...@gmail.com>.
Alexey,
+1.
I personally also follow this style.
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a while.
> I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should allow
> the old style when the method signature (without throws clause) fits the
> line.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> 2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi Dmitriy,
> >
> > I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
> >
> > I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> > dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > I read
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines,
> > > but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
> > >
> > > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this creates
> > > difficulties for reading.
> > >
> > > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
> > >
> > > ```java
> > > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > > ....
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> > >
> > > ```java
> > > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg, boolean
> > sql,
> > > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > > ```
> > > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> > >
> > > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> > >
> > > ```java
> > > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... , Object
> > objN){
> > > ....
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page delimiter.
> > >
> > > ```java
> > > public void foo(
> > > Object obj1,
> > > Object obj2,
> > > Object obj3,
> > > ... ,
> > > Object objN
> > > ){
> > > ....
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to merge if
> > > method arguments were changed.
> > >
> >
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Alexey Goncharuk <al...@gmail.com>.
Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a while.
I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should allow
the old style when the method signature (without throws clause) fits the
line.
Thoughts?
2018-05-03 12:09 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Dmitriy,
>
> I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
>
> I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> >:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I read
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines,
> > but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
> >
> > In many places in the code, I see different code style, this creates
> > difficulties for reading.
> >
> > It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
> >
> > ```java
> > public void foo(Object obj1,
> > Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> > ....
> > }
> > ```
> > An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
> >
> > ```java
> > private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg, boolean
> sql,
> > Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> > Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> > ```
> > I suggest two options for writing arguments.
> >
> > If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
> >
> > ```java
> > public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... , Object
> objN){
> > ....
> > }
> > ```
> > If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page delimiter.
> >
> > ```java
> > public void foo(
> > Object obj1,
> > Object obj2,
> > Object obj3,
> > ... ,
> > Object objN
> > ){
> > ....
> > }
> > ```
> > In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to merge if
> > method arguments were changed.
> >
>
Re: method arguments code style
Posted by Dmitry Pavlov <dp...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dmitriy,
I like your proposal, so +1 from me.
I think it would make code more readable and easy to understand.
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
чт, 3 мая 2018 г. в 11:31, Dmitriy Govorukhin <dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
>:
> Hi folks,
>
> I read
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines,
> but did not find anything about code style for method arguments.
>
> In many places in the code, I see different code style, this creates
> difficulties for reading.
>
> It seems to me an example below is rather difficult to perceive.
>
> ```java
> public void foo(Object obj1,
> Object obj2, Object obj3,... ,Object objN){
> ....
> }
> ```
> An example GridCacheProcessor.addCacheOnJoin(...)
>
> ```java
> private void addCacheOnJoin(CacheConfiguration<?, ?> cfg, boolean sql,
> Map<String, CacheInfo> caches,
> Map<String, CacheInfo> templates)
> ```
> I suggest two options for writing arguments.
>
> If arguments are placed in a line before the page delimiter.
>
> ```java
> public void foo(Object obj1, Object obj2, Object obj3 , ... , Object objN){
> ....
> }
> ```
> If the arguments are not placed in the line before the page delimiter.
>
> ```java
> public void foo(
> Object obj1,
> Object obj2,
> Object obj3,
> ... ,
> Object objN
> ){
> ....
> }
> ```
> In my personal experience, the last example is much easier to merge if
> method arguments were changed.
>