On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 14:45:09 -0500, Matt Sicker wrote:
Assertion classes are just containers for static methods. Using
"import
static" is the only way in Java to import the individual methods as
if the
class itself were a package. Also, doing this is pretty common when
using
the Assert class as all its methods are prefixed with "assert"
anyways.
It's not because something is widespread that it should be emulated.
Is there any good reason to use "import static"? [Saving the typing
of 7 characters cannot be one of them.]
It can (and does) happen that "assert..." methods are defined
on a per project basis, and nothing is gained when the reader
has to check the top of the file to be sure of what class is
actually used.
My point was just that rather than cleaning up, the commit was
obfuscating (even if so little) the source code.
I prefer the other way around. :-)
YMMV,
Gilles
On 15 October 2017 at 13:44, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 12:22:13 +0200, Pascal Schumacher wrote:
Just for consistency.
Consistency is fine. ;-)
All almost all tests already used static
imports, so I adjusted the few that did not.
It's the use of "import static" which I was questioning.
Gilles
-Pascal
Am 15.10.2017 um 11:44 schrieb Gilles:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 09:34:04 +0000 (UTC),
pascalschumac...@apache.org
wrote:
Repository: commons-text
Updated Branches:
refs/heads/master 51645b4f0 -> 8f7d0494d
always use static imports for assertion methods
Why?
Gilles
[...]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
