[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?
From: |
Nic Ferrier |
Subject: |
Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed? |
Date: |
01 Feb 2002 00:27:07 +0000 |
Bryce raised an issue about the extends and implements formatting:
Bryce said:
> I would prefer
>
> class X extends Y implement Z
>
> because
>
> a) Its what everything already uses
> b) Its rare for a class name and supertype list to be so long that it
> needs to be split onto multiple lines.
>
Nic replied:
> Hmmm... what about in those example where there is a long run.
Bryce replied:
> In these cases I agree that splitting is the way to go. Maybe we could
> just put "implements" on a new line, eg:
>
> public class ArrayList extends AbstractList
> implements List, RandomAccess, Cloneable, Serializable
Since there is only ever going to be one extended class (!) I think
that's a pretty good idea.
If anybody disagrees let me know.
Otherwise I will proceed with the draft of the code standards and
working on a patch for indent.
Nic
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, (continued)
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Brian Jones, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Nic Ferrier, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Per Bothner, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Nic Ferrier, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Per Bothner, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Nic Ferrier, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Brian Jones, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Nic Ferrier, 2002/01/31
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Tom Tromey, 2002/01/31
Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?, Bryce McKinlay, 2002/01/31
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: [Javaweb-people] So are we agreed?,
Nic Ferrier <=