Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36724
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Style police (Was: Re: How to handle same sanity checks) |
| Date | 2017-06-25 19:19 -0400 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <oipgdi$j5k$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <87o9tgo0a9.fsf@munus.decebal.nl> <er9hnkFql1qU1@mid.individual.net> <oiov2l$1nso$1@gioia.aioe.org> <oip9ms$tkh$1@dont-email.me> |
On 6/25/2017 5:28 PM, Eric Sosman wrote: > 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?" Also note that this particular item in the standard Java coding convention is not one that I would consider worth pointing out if I saw a code not following - it is within what I consider "acceptable deviations". So absolutely no "style police" here. I will though point to it if somebody suggests the opposite convention. "style police police" or whatever. Arne
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
How to handle same sanity checks Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2017-06-22 11:10 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-22 10:27 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2017-06-22 13:21 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2017-06-23 06:51 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-06-24 12:06 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-24 10:33 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-06-24 16:46 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-24 19:37 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Andreas Leitgeb <avl@logic.at> - 2017-06-22 11:26 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-06-22 07:44 -0400
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Andreas Leitgeb <avl@logic.at> - 2017-06-22 12:30 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-06-22 07:40 -0400
Re: How to handle same sanity checks v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2017-06-22 18:33 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2017-06-23 06:48 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-06-23 09:57 -0400
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2017-06-23 16:31 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-23 17:21 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-06-26 05:21 -0700
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-26 13:34 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-26 15:22 +0000
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-06-25 22:55 -0400
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Marcel Mueller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org> - 2017-06-22 23:07 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2017-06-25 09:52 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-06-25 12:31 +0200
Re: How to handle same sanity checks Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-06-25 14:23 -0400
Style police (Was: Re: How to handle same sanity checks) Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-06-25 17:28 -0400
Re: Style police (Was: Re: How to handle same sanity checks) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-06-25 19:14 -0400
Re: Style police (Was: Re: How to handle same sanity checks) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-06-25 19:19 -0400
Re: Style police (Was: Re: How to handle same sanity checks) Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2017-06-26 23:34 +0200
csiph-web