logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shapira, Yoav" <Yoav.Shap...@mpi.com>
Subject RE: checkstyle.properties?
Date Tue, 04 Feb 2003 13:53:57 GMT
Howdy,
I'll chime in with my 2 cents (US) but I know I might get some flak ;)

- Leave the checkstyle properties empty (except for baseDir if we want,
since that has nothing to do with style checking), to check for the
standard Sun Java Coding Conventions.
- This will result in many (expect ~500 per average size .java file)
thousands of checkstyle errors reported.
- Treat conformance to the Sun Java Coding Conventions as a long-term
gradual effort.  Re-run checkstyle periodically (at least once before
every stable release) to see the error count drop down.  There's no need
to go class by class and fix every little whitespace error at once.

Checkstyle errors are not terrible things to have.  Having the reporting
mechanism in place shows log4j's commitment to good style.  Having some
unique (read: non-standard) set of checkstyle conventions slightly
reduces the strength of the "we're using checkstyle to check ourselves"
statement.

And on this topic, it's been my experience that using a formatter
(Jalopy is my current favorite: http://jalopy.sourceforge.net/) in
conjunction with checkstyle eliminate about 80% of the checkstyle
reported error right away, with no human effort.  I can contribute Ant
tasks to run jalopy on log4j classes if desired.

Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics


>-----Original Message-----
>From: mwomack@apache.org [mailto:mwomack@apache.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 2:16 AM
>To: Log4J Developers List
>Subject: RE: checkstyle.properties?
>
>I checked in an updated checkstyle target, but the list of properties
is
>not
>complete.  I am going to look at what some other projects have done.
If
>anyone has an opinion, now is the time.
>
>-Mark
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:Yoav.Shapira@mpi.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 6:05 AM
>> To: Log4J Developers List
>> Subject: RE: checkstyle.properties?
>>
>>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> >BUT, the 2.4 version of checkstyle has a completely different ant
task,
>> and
>> >does need a properties file. :-)  I converted the old ant task to
the
>> new
>> >one:
>>
>> Small side note: I prefer to specify the properties inside the Ant
file,
>> not in a separate file.  I use CheckStyle 2.4 from Ant as well, it
lokos
>> something like this:
>> <checkstyle failOnViolation="false">
>>   <property key="checkstyle.wrap.operator" value="ignore" />
>>   ...
>>   <fileset dir="${srcDir}">
>>     <include name="**/*.java" />
>>   </fileset>
>>
>>   <formatter type="xml" toFile="${checkStyleReportFile}" />
>> </checkstyle>
>>
>> Yoav Shapira
>> Millennium ChemInformatics
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message