State of the Java Style Guidelines document

Mon Jul 31 07:37:01 UTC 2017

That's good to hear, thanks for the clarification.

For now that leaves the question what's blocking this from being published
or maybe what can be done to move this forward. Any idea who can publish
this and/or what procedures to follow?

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Jim Graham <james.graham at oracle.com>
wrote:

> 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/~a
>> lundblad/styleguide/index-v6.html
>>                     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~a
>> lundblad/styleguide/index-v6.html>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>