Re: Antwort: Re: [OJB-developers] various questions

[Jakob B. <jbr...@ho...>]

hi,

a can also live with another bracing-style as long as eclipse supports it
....

member access via getters and setters even inside the class has the
advantage, that you exactly know, where the variable is accessed.
there may be a small performance penalty for getters and setters but i
always used them since my smalltalk days.
getters and setters do not have to be public.

jakob

----- Original Message -----
From: <Joa...@tp...>
To: <obj...@li...>
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 9:00 AM
Subject: Antwort: Re: [OJB-developers] various questions


>
> Hy,
>
> discussions about braces style often result in flame wars (not big ones,
> but nevertheless). I'd say Thomas should just say which braces style he
> prefers and we all use it in OJB, as I don't think a discussion about it
> will bring any results. I also had exactly the same discussion in my
> company and it only showed that each style has its advantages and
> disadvantage, almost everybody knows them and the only difference is the
> priority the people set on readability, compact codex, ...
>
> member access via getters/setters? Even inside the class? I wouldn't do
> that. Sometimes (very seldom actually) I  got some additional logic inside
> setters that doesn't make sense when  used from inside the class.
>
> other than that I like the rules (they are like Suns smalles common
> denominator).
>
> only one more thing: there's a typo in 5.e. I think it should read
> "protected members declared before public members".
>
> regards
> Joachim Sauer
>
>
>
>
>                     "Jakob
>                     Braeuchi"            An:
<cgr...@de...>, <tho...@ho...>
>                     <jbraeuchi@ho        Kopie:
<CGr...@de...>, <Joa...@tp...>,
>                     tmail.com>
<obj...@li...>
>                                          Thema:  Re: [OJB-developers]
various questions
>                     29.04.2002
>                     07:48
>
>
>
>
>
> hi,
>
> 4.) i prefer the following style for braces
>
> if (true)
> {
>     doThis();
> }
>
> i think it's more readable than
>
> if (true) {
>     doThis();
> }
>
> another issue is member access. instance variable should be accessed using
> getters and setters .
>
> just my 0.02 CHF
>
> jakob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Greenlee" <CGr...@de...>
> To: <tho...@ho...>
> Cc: <CGr...@de...>; <Joa...@tp...>;
> <obj...@li...>
> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 7:12 PM
> Subject: Re: [OJB-developers] various questions
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > That's a nice idea. I think the simplest way to start such a
discussion
> > >  to start with someones first draft proposal. Others might comment on
> > > this draft.
> > >
> > > Any volunteers?
> >
> >
> > Sure. :)  I'll just throw out the ones I'm most familiar with to get
> things
> > started.
> >
> > 1.  Non-static member variables.
> >
> >     a.  References prefixed with "this.".
> >     b.  First letter lowercase, beginnings of subsequent words
> capitalized.
> >
> >         private int Anint = 0;
> >
> >         public void increment() {
> >             Anint++;
> >         }
> >
> >     would become
> >
> >         private int anInt = 0;
> >
> >         public void increment() {
> >             this.anInt++;
> >         }
> > 2.  Static member variables.
> >
> >     a.  All uppercase.
> >     b.  Underscores ("_") used to separate words.
> >
> >     So
> >
> >         private static int aStaticInt = 50;
> >
> >     would become
> >
> >         private static int A_STATIC_INT = 50;
> >
> > 3.  Method names (static and non-static).
> >
> >     a.  First letter lowercase, beginnings of subsequent words
> capitalized.
> >
> >     So
> >
> >         public static int GetInt() {
> >             return 5;
> >         }
> >
> >     would become
> >
> >         public static int getInt() {
> >             return 5;
> >         }
> >
> > 4.  Braces around blocks of code.
> >
> >     a.  Opening brace on the end of the line starting the block.
> >     b.  Closing braces aligned with the beginning of the line starting
> the
> > block.
> >
> >     So
> >
> >         if (true)
> >            {
> >                doThis();
> >            }
> >
> >     would become
> >
> >         if (true) {
> >             doThis();
> >         }
> >
> > 5.  Method / member organization.
> >
> >     a.  Member variables declared before methods.
> >     b.  Static members declared before non-static members.
> >     c.  Static method declared before non-static methods.
> >     d.  Private members declared before protected members.
> >     e.  Protected members declared before protected members.
> >     f.  Public members declared after all others.
> >     g.  Same precedence for methods.
> >
> > 6.  Test class naming.
> >
> >     a.  All JUnit test classes should be named "xxxTest".
> >
> >     So
> >
> >         public class TestOfClassA extends TestCase {
> >         }
> >
> >     would become
> >
> >         public class ClassATest extends TestCase {
> >         }
> >
> > And that's what I can think of off the top of my head.  Have at it. :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Objectbridge-developers mailing list
> > Obj...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/objectbridge-developers
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Objectbridge-developers mailing list
> Obj...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/objectbridge-developers
>