Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Style police (Was: Re: How to handle same sanity checks)
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:28:26 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <oip9ms$tkh$1@dont-email.me>
References: <87o9tgo0a9.fsf@munus.decebal.nl> <er9hnkFql1qU1@mid.individual.net> <oiov2l$1nso$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 21:24:44 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="a5f3c3584a1d280f80d637147495788d"; logging-data="30353"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+NAjeatowHMdpArnkrhne8"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
In-Reply-To: <oiov2l$1nso$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AujHBZIe2XLZfh9ng4sPtW2ycuk=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:36722

On 6/25/2017 2:23 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 6/25/2017 6:31 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:
>> [...]
>> A few minor remarks: brackets around comparisons are not needed.
> 
> Not necessary.
> 
> But actually recommended in the traditional Java coding convention.
> 
> <quote>
> 10.5.1 Parentheses
> 
> It is generally a good idea to use parentheses liberally in expressions 
> involving mixed operators to avoid operator precedence problems. Even if 
> the operator precedence seems clear to you, it might not be to 
> others-you shouldn't assume that other programmers know precedence as 
> well as you do.
> 
>      if (a == b && c == d)     // AVOID!
>      if ((a == b) && (c == d)) // RIGHT
> 
> </quote>

     Is anybody aware of any actual research into the value of
this "generally good" practice, or does "generally good" merely
mean "it's my prejudice, so as author I'll claim it's good?"

     I'll note in passing that the author is no Java Jedi.  Consider
section 10.4 of the same document, which recommends

	if ((c++ = d++) != 0)

... as an "improvement" over an equally uncompilable bad example.

-- 
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
Thirteen hundred five days to go.