On 24/04/2008, Daniel Tuser <
dan.tuser@...> wrote:
> Colin Adams wrote:
> I know that the indexing clause does not conform to the Gobo styling
> standards so far. And the class name should be in the same line as the class
> keyword. Those are the two non-conforming things I know. Did you find more?
There area a load of empty feature clauses and a dummy invariant in at
least one
class.
Then I dislike the absence of a blank line after create and inherit.
Also I dislike seeing local variables with names that might class with
attributes (and so forcing unnecessary renames in descendants).
I personally now write all argument names as a_*, and all local names
as either a single chanaracter or l_*. I am converting my existing
code on a piecemeal basis.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone_______________________________________________
gobo-eiffel-develop mailing list
gobo-eiffel-develop@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gobo-eiffel-develop
