[cp-patches] Re: [RFA/JDWP] StringReferenceCommandSet.java

[Aaron Luchko]

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 14:39 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Aaron" == Aaron Luchko <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> Aaron> Okay, this is the first implementation of a CommandSet.
> 
> This seems reasonable enough to me.  A few nits though...
> 
> Aaron> The reason I'm still using a switch in this class
> Aaron> even though there's only a single command to choose from is consistency
> Aaron> with the rest of the CommandSets.
> 
> Rationale like this should go in comments in the code.

Alright

> 
> Aaron> One additional thing I was wondering about is the comments for classes
> Aaron> implementing an interface. There's nothing specific about any of the
> Aaron> runCommands that should require a specific javadoc and running javadoc
> Aaron> will pick up the command of the interface defining the method if there
> Aaron> isn't a comment where it's implemented. However that will mean there
> Aaron> won't be any comments when one's looking at the actual code.
> 
> I wouldn't worry about this.

Cool I'll just leave them out then.

> Aaron> +          case JdwpConstants.CommandSet.StringReference.Value:
> 
> Constants should be all upper case; this is just a general java style
> rule that everybody follows.

Here's the updated patch

Aaron

ChangeLog
2005-07-04  Aaron Luchko  <address@hidden>

        * gnu/classpath/jdwp/processor/StringReferenceCommandSet.java:
New file.

jdwpStringReference2.patch
Description: Text Data