[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: new jalopy available

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: new jalopy available
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:35:48 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

I've noticed two general styles of 'sorting' in Classpath sources. Both styles separate the metadata types (all fields are listed, followed by member classes, constructors, methods). Within those groupings, one style sorts all methods alphabetically, and the other sorts methods according to the order which they are listed in Sun's documentation (which tends to be, but isn't always, by common functionality). There is also the question of whether implementation-only members (private or default access) should be mixed in with exposed members (protected or public), or whether they come later.

I don't have a general opinion - alphabetical sorting makes it easier to find a method when just reading a file, but following Sun's sorting makes it easier to compare a method to Sun's documentation of how it should behave. Either choice is fine with me, especially since emacs has wrap-around searching. But if Jalopy can make the decision easier, by enforcing a sorting style, it might be worth considering.

Mark Wielaard wrote:

On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 23:06, Raif S. Naffah wrote:

jalopy is able to handle grouping, and sorting, of class elements (e.g.static field and initialisers, instance fields, constructors, etc...) and separating them with a 1-line separator (2 with a blank line followup).

how (strongly) do people feel about enabling this?

I don't like that very much. I like it when methods are grouped
logically (same kind of methods) together. Although simply adding all
constructors, static fields and field members together is probably OK.



Someday, I might put a cute statement here.

Eric Blake             address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]