Hey, thanks for your feedback. It's interesting to see that there seem to be two opposing opinions: Some try to avoid static imports as much as possible, while others use them if it makes the code "more fluent".
I found the Matt's comment especially useful, for pointing out, that we (as developers of o.a.commons) have have to views/roles. On the one hand we are creators of APIs that should read fluently without having to use static imports extensively. On the other hand we are developers who have to decide how we want to use static imports internally. I think that's the core of my question. Do we have any kind of guideline regarding the use of static imports in commons library code? Regards, Benedikt 2013/2/5 Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> > I would say that in general the Commons libraries favor *creating* APIs > such that intent reads most fluently by *not* using static imports. I > would venture to say that given the examples of when static imports might > be desirable, a good rule of thumb wrt *use* of static imports would again > be "which way does intent read most fluently?" > > Using this approach, the answer would be: it depends on the library > defining the static member. > > Matt > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Another common use is with junit to import assertEquals and such. > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > We haven't decided yet how to handle static imports. To form some > > rules, > > > > we'd like to hear what others think about static imports and what > rules > > > of > > > > thumb you use in your projects. > > > > > > I do not use static imports at work. I do not like using them unless it > > is > > > for math like expressions (with PI and the like). > > > > > > > > >
