2012/1/4 Carol Frampton <cfram...@adobe.com> > There is a coding standard but unfortunately not everyone chose to follow > it, or only followed the parts they liked. > > http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Coding+Conventions > > I am in favor of a coding standard. I like uniform looking code. >
+1 for the coding conventions. Although I do want to point out that the coding conventions at http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Coding+Conventions are not complete and there are a lot of "TBD"'s in the document. We've been using a variant subset of these conventions (so much for coding conventions) and made some changes that I think are worth being discussed. For instance, repeating an accessor name in the block comment is cumbersome when refactoring the accessor name as the documentation is not updated. Although your IDE might do a code replace as well as a text replace, this is not ideal as it will most likely change the text in unwanted places. IMO it is better just to have a separator line (the first line of 40 chars) above the accessor so you can visually distinguish between blocks of accessors without repeating the accessor name. Other changes are tabs instead of spaces, braces alignment and a few others. If there is a discussion being set up to discuss and finish the document, I'm willing to participate. -- Christophe Herreman http://www.herrodius.com http://www.springactionscript.org http://www.as3commons.org
