1 |
Christian Faulhammer wrote: |
2 |
> java-pkg-simple: |
3 |
> In my eyes, defining all local variables at the beginning of a function |
4 |
> makes it easier to read. |
5 |
|
6 |
Sorry, Fauli, i totally missed your mail as it was only addressed to |
7 |
gentoo-dev, while I've been intently watching gentoo-java... |
8 |
|
9 |
java-pkg-simple_src_compile() was designed in a modular fashion, with |
10 |
blocks for compile, javadoc and package which are pretty much |
11 |
independent from one another. That's the reason why every one of these |
12 |
blocks has its own local variables, instead of a single set of locals |
13 |
for the whole function. |
14 |
|
15 |
Originally I wrote them as independent functions, and they might well be |
16 |
turned into such independent functions by adding a few function headers |
17 |
and braces. So if ever the need arises, that's what I'd do. Splitting |
18 |
locals would increase the footprint of such a change. |
19 |
|
20 |
From my #gentoo-java log from 2009-01-03: |
21 |
(11:24:36 UTC) MvG: |
22 |
java-pkg-simple_src_compile has five clear parts; would it make sense to |
23 |
place these in separate functions? This would allow more flexibility for |
24 |
ebuilds that want to use some but not all of these. |
25 |
(11:26:20 UTC) ali_bush: |
26 |
MvG: up to you, if they are clear, they could alway be separated out later |
27 |
|
28 |
To sum things up: yes, I could change the local declarations, but I'd |
29 |
rather keep things as they are, unless you object more vehemently. |
30 |
|
31 |
Greetings, |
32 |
Martin von Gagern (MvG) |