State of the Java Style Guidelines document
Jim Graham
james.graham at oracle.com
Thu Jul 27 20:39:26 UTC 2017
I've already said that I think it should be published. I have an objection that I've noted just to keep it on the
record (via broken record loop), but that wasn't a blocking objection...
...jim
On 7/27/17 1:44 AM, Lars Francke wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback everyone!
>
> I understand that people have different personal preferences various topics and we'll never be able to find one style
> that accommodates all of them.
>
> Just to explain what my personal motivation for this push is:
> Lots of open-source projects (I'm mostly working with the Big Data Apache projects) list the old Sun Code Conventions[1]
> as the code style to follow. Unfortunately those haven't been updated in 20 years and they leave out lots of minor
> details that have been clarified in the new version. So for me a revised version of this old document (with no/little
> changes in the actual code style) would already be a huge benefit.
>
> I'm not lobbying for these style guidelines to be adopted by every OpenJDK project (or any project in fact). I'd love
> for those guidelines to be published as-is as "guidelines" that projects (outside of the OpenJDK as well) can adopt.
> Nothing's stopping you (as is done in Apache projects frequently) to have your own guidelines "inherit" from these and
> overwrite certain rules.
>
> >I'm sorry, I can't bring myself to reduce the readability of my code because the one person in charge had something
> against a single additional line in the source base that would provide clarity...
>
> People obviously have different opinions on readability and I'm not sure if it's a good idea to list alternative
> versions for all contentious issues because it would make the whole document more or less meaningless. I think Jonathan
> has a good point in that the guidelines already cater for differing styles and you could publish your own version for
> the FX project that lists the points where you deviate from these guidelines.
>
> A more procedural question though: Assuming we can find a document version that we all agree on. What would be needed to
> publish it and who'd be the right person to do so?
>
> Thank you,
> Lars
>
> [1] <http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/codeconvtoc-136057.html>
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:46 PM, Jim Graham <james.graham at oracle.com <mailto:james.graham at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> Agreed, but this version is already in use in the code and was adopted by an entire group, though not the group that
> the effort towards updating this document was based in.
>
> I had suggested it to the author. It seemed to go nowhere and I don't believe it was presented in a poll that was
> sent out asking for feedback on style variations so it never got the visibility I think it deserved. There were
> clear biases to ignore the input at the time and I thought it short-sighted.
>
> There are many areas where I disagree with the variant chosen, but will go with the flow, but this is one area where
> I really don't get why the suggestion was ignored as I see it as superior in terms of maintainability on every
> single front to what was documented - to the extent where I will always be non-compliant with the suggested form -
> I'm sorry, I can't bring myself to reduce the readability of my code because the one person in charge had something
> against a single additional line in the source base that would provide clarity...
>
> ...jim
>
>
> On 7/26/17 12:30 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>
> Religious wars are waged over lesser issues.
>
> I think it is presumptious to recommend a style for all Java code, but I do think it is reasonable to establish
> coding guidelines for a specific code base, such as OpenJDK. Even so, opinions will still differ, and there was
> an attempt in Andreas' work to accommodate reasonable alternatives, with a general proviso of, "when editing
> existing code that has a consistent style, try to conform to that style, and not slavishly conform to some
> different standard."
>
> -- Jon
>
>
> On 07/26/2017 12:21 PM, Jim Graham wrote:
>
> Sorry to sound like a broken record here - I think it should be published too, but... ;)
>
> If only it would adopt the convention used in much of 2D and FX of putting a brace on its own line after a
> line-wrapped conditional/method declaration (preferably as the primary form, but even as an acceptable
> alternative):
>
> public void longMethodNameUsedOnlyForIllustration(SomeLongClassName paramA,
> LongClassName paramB,
> int someOtherParam)
> throws OtherFormsAreUglySmileyFaceException
> {
> ...
> }
>
> provides the cleanest and clearest sight line to see where the body of the method/class/conditional starts...
>
> </broken record mode>
>
> ...jim
>
> On 7/26/17 3:21 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
>
> I agree with Lars,
> this should be published ASAP.
>
> regards,
> Remi
>
>
>
>
> On July 26, 2017 8:41:29 AM GMT+02:00, Lars Francke <lars.francke at gmail.com
> <mailto:lars.francke at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've been following the work Andreas Lundblad has done on the new Java
> Style Guidelines[1]. I know that he's not with Oracle anymore but the
> draft
> looks good (and has done so for at least a year), I think all comments
> have
> been worked into it. Why has it not been published? Is anyone working
> on
> this, if yes, who?
>
> I'd be happy to do any work needed to bring it to a final and published
> form if needed. But to me it looks ready to be published today (apart
> from
> a few minor issues I've reported to Andreas already).
>
> The old code conventions from 1997 can really use an updated version.
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
>
>
> [1] <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alundblad/styleguide/index-v6.html
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alundblad/styleguide/index-v6.html>>
>
>
>
>
More information about the discuss
mailing list