Mark,
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 2:52 AM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 05/10/18 19:46, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> <snip/>
> >>> +1 a lack of { } is too big a possible bug source to ignore.
> >
> >> I just tried enabling the CheckStyle test for this. There were
> >> just under three thousand errors.
> >
> >> I'm wondering if it is worth going through the code base fixing
> >> these.
> >
> > I'm nearly -1 on this, mostly because it will make back-porting stuff
> > a total PITA.
>
> Fair enough. I don't need much convincing not to do it as I have plenty
> of other stuff on my TODO list.
>
> > Definitely opportunistically "upgrade" code we find here and there,
> > but I don't think it's worth taking a day or two to add missing
> > explicit blocks everywhere.
>
> ACK.
>
> >> On a related topic, I did notice several instance of the
> >> following:
> >
> >> if (a == b) ... if (a == c) ... if (a == d) ...
> >
> >> that could be more efficiently written as:
> >
> >> if (a == b) { ... } else if (a == c) { ... } else if (a == d) {
> >> ... }
> >
> > That would be nice. Sounds like a BZ issue that could have a
> > "beginner" keyword attached.
>
> Good idea. Feel free to add that if I don't get there first.
>
>
Did you notice the consecutive if statements by chance, or does CheckStyle
report those? I just imported the CheckStyle profile into IntelliJ IDEA
and I see more than 82,000 warnings, many of which complaining of missing
Javadoc comments and lines longer than 80 characters.
Thanks,
Igal
