On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:34:36PM -0600, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > I'm not sure how I feel about an arbitrary number of lines per method > (although 200 is obviously quite high and I would recommend modularizing > such a method), but I'm not in favor of limiting the number of methods per > class (especially not to just 10). Some types of objects simply need many > discrete operations and 10 is too limiting.
+1 to both thoughts. Smaller methods is good, but a specific number of lines as policy vs. a rule of thumb are two different things. I completely agree with Daan's underlying concern though... some of these class files are horrible to try and comprehend. My favorite example: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack/?p=cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java;hb=master > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > I am all for re-oping discussions on the ten commandments, but let's stick > > to method and class level for now. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Donal Lafferty > > <donal.laffe...@citrix.com>wrote: > > > > > Hmm. The original comment was "maximum length of 80 lines per method". > > > > > > Did you want to start a new thread covering max characters per line? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Isaac Chiang [mailto:isaacchi...@gmail.com] > > > > Sent: 16 July 2013 11:12 AM > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] coding convention for method - and class length > > > > > > > > +1 for the maximum length per line > > > > > > > > I also agree with Wido that around 120 characters will be more fit > > > current > > > > needs. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > Isaac > > > > > > > > > -- > *Mike Tutkowski* > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > o: 303.746.7302 > Advancing the way the world uses the > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> > *™*
