jgrapht-developers

RE: [jgrapht-developers] Jalopy update

[Barak N. <ba...@3p...>]

> I still think the explicit list of import is preferable.  To be
> argumentative, modern IDE's do indeed show where the class is coming =
from,
> but they also do clever folding :)... One can automatically unclutter =
the
> import list by letting the IDE fold it (I think it's even the default =
in
> Eclipse)...

Oh, while we're there, the IDE claim could also be used to justify
eliminating my 'm_' prefixing, because recent IDE's highlight member =
fields
differently to local variables.  I think the prefixing is no longer
justified.  Sorry John, I know you never liked the prefixing anyway.

Barak=20

Re: [jgrapht-developers] Jalopy update

[John V. S. <js...@gm...>]

Well, when you put it that way...

If I weren't so lazy, I would go write an Emacs macro to strip them all
right now.

JVS

Barak Naveh wrote:
>>I still think the explicit list of import is preferable.  To be
>>argumentative, modern IDE's do indeed show where the class is coming from,
>>but they also do clever folding :)... One can automatically unclutter the
>>import list by letting the IDE fold it (I think it's even the default in
>>Eclipse)...
> 
> 
> Oh, while we're there, the IDE claim could also be used to justify
> eliminating my 'm_' prefixing, because recent IDE's highlight member fields
> differently to local variables.  I think the prefixing is no longer
> justified.  Sorry John, I know you never liked the prefixing anyway.
> 
> Barak 
> 
> 
>