10 Nov
2011
10 Nov
'11
7:34 a.m.
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called from velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used.
And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end
up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter
on the total size of the wiki. On the other hand, I prefer $discard
since it's more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does:
"$discard the output of this method call".
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
10 Nov
10 Nov
8:05 a.m.
On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called from
velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end up
creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to
parse, and lighter on the total size of the wiki.
The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll slim down
the wiki size… yeah! :)
Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable names is better.
On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's
more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this
method call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
8:55 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
I use either $discard or $dummy since I found them more meaningful.
I do not like $ok and $output which not really means that we do not care of
them.
I agree with Vincent, that size and easy typing is far less important
compare to having meaningful name, but I not that it is easier to type
"dummy" than "discard".
Denis
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:05, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called
from velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used.
And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end
up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you
prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster
to parse, and lighter
on the total size of the wiki.
The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll
slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is better.
On the other hand, I prefer $discard since
it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard
the output of this method
call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
9:23 a.m.
2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
How about:
9. $void
But I don't have a strong opion about this.
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called from
velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end up
creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused $ok is the
shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter on the total size of the wiki.
The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll slim down
the wiki size… yeah! :)
Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable names is better.
On the other hand, I prefer $discard since
it's more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the
output of this method call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
9:56 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:23, Andreas Jonsson <aj(a)member.fsf.org> wrote:
2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
How about:
9. $void
Very nice, short and meaningful !
I am +1
On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called
from velocity, usually with something like:
>
> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
>
> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used.
And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
>
> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't
end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
But I don't have a strong opion about this.
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type,
faster to parse, and lighter
on the total size of the wiki.
The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll
slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is
better.
> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
10:02 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson <aj(a)member.fsf.org> wrote:
2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
How about:
9. $void Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called from
velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end up
creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
But I don't have a strong opion about this.
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
$ok is
the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter on the total size of the
wiki.
The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll slim down
the wiki size… yeah! :)
Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable names is better.
On the other hand, I prefer $discard since
it's more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the
output of this method call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
11:54 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Hi,
My preference goes to $discard since it had the closest semantically
meaningful relation to what the variable actually does. Or, in
the variable's own voice: "use me, discard me".
Guillaume
PS: note that's it's a preference, not a strong feeling
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson
<aj(a)member.fsf.org>
wrote:
How about:
9. $void
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
>
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called from velocity, usually with something like:
>>
>> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
>>
>> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used.
And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
>>
>> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't
end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
But I don't have a strong opion about this.
>> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter
on
the total size of the wiki.
>
> The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll
slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
>
> Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is
better.
>
>> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
1:16 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Hi,
I was using $temp before Sergiu pointed to me that $discard is pretty much
the existing standard already used almost everywhere. There might be some
other places where something other than $discard is used, but I really see
no point in starting to use something else. If we'd start using something
else, we`d still be having at least 2 styles for at least 1-2 years since
nobody would be touching the old code.
So I`m +1 on stabilizing to $discard.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson <aj(a)member.fsf.org>
wrote:
> > 2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent
Massol skrev:
> >>
> >> On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi devs,
> >>>
> >>> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
> called from velocity, usually with something like:
> >>>
> >>> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
> >>>
> >>> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be
used.
> And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
> $ignore...
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we
don't
> end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
> you prefer:
> >>>
> >>> 1. $discard
> >>> 2. $discarded
> >>> 3. $ignore
> >>> 4. $ignored
> >>> 5. $ok
> >>> 6. $output
> >>
> >> We can also think of:
> >>
> >> 7. $dummy (I always use this one)
> >> 8. $unused
> >
> > How about:
> >
> > 9. $void
>
> +1, that's what I'm using usually too
>
> >
> > But I don't have a strong opion about this.
> >
> >
> >>> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter
> on the total size of the wiki.
> >>
> >> The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments
it'll
> slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
> >>
> >> Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
> names is better.
> >>
> >>> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
> conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
> call".
> >>
> >> They're all fine with me except $output.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> -Vincent
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> devs mailing list
> >> devs(a)xwiki.org
> >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > devs mailing list
> > devs(a)xwiki.org
> > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Mortagne
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> devs(a)xwiki.org
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
4:24 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
+1 for $void - sounds better
+1 for $discard if we consider the 'standard' that already exists in the
code
Thanks,
Caty
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 14:16, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I was using $temp before Sergiu pointed to me that $discard is pretty much
the existing standard already used almost everywhere. There might be some
other places where something other than $discard is used, but I really see
no point in starting to use something else. If we'd start using something
else, we`d still be having at least 2 styles for at least 1-2 years since
nobody would be touching the old code.
So I`m +1 on stabilizing to $discard.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Thomas Mortagne <
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson <aj(a)member.fsf.org>
wrote:
> > 2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent
Massol skrev:
> >>
> >> On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi devs,
> >>>
> >>> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output
when
> called from velocity, usually with something like:
> >>>
> >>> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
> >>>
> >>> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't
be
used.
And everyone seems to have his favorite name for
it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
>
> But I don't have a strong opion about this.
>
>
>>> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and
lighter
>>
>> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't
end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
>
> 1. $discard
> 2. $discarded
> 3. $ignore
> 4. $ignored
> 5. $ok
> 6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
How about:
9. $void on the total size of the wiki.
>>
>> The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments
it'll
slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
> Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is
better.
>
>> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
4:25 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Hi,
Out of curiosity, here are some numbers regarding current usage of the
proposed terms:
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$discard" . -R | wc -l
544
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$void" . -R | wc -l
5
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$dummy" . -R | wc -l
6
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$ignore" . -R | wc -l
0
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$temp" . -R | wc -l
234
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$ok" . -R | wc -l
121
[Enygma@Enygma xwiki-platform]$ grep "\$output" . -R | wc -l
25
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I was using $temp before Sergiu pointed to me that $discard is pretty much
the existing standard already used almost everywhere. There might be some
other places where something other than $discard is used, but I really see
no point in starting to use something else. If we'd start using something
else, we`d still be having at least 2 styles for at least 1-2 years since
nobody would be touching the old code.
So I`m +1 on stabilizing to $discard.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Thomas Mortagne <
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson
<aj(a)member.fsf.org>
wrote:
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
>
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called from velocity, usually with something like:
>>
>> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
>>
>> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be
used. And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
>>
>> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't
end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
>
> 1. $discard
> 2. $discarded
> 3. $ignore
> 4. $ignored
> 5. $ok
> 6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
How about:
9. $void
But I don't have a strong opion about this.
>> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and
lighter on
the total size of the wiki.
>
> The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments
it'll slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
>
> Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is
better.
>
>> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
4:30 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson
<aj(a)member.fsf.org> wrote:
I would add that "void" make clean it's nothing while "discard"
could
be a real (probably boolean) variable IMO
2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
How about:
9. $void Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called from
velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end up
creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
But I don't have a strong opion about this.
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
$ok is
the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter on the total size of the
wiki.
The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments it'll slim down
the wiki size… yeah! :)
Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable names is better.
On the other hand, I prefer $discard since
it's more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the
output of this method call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
6:24 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
I would add that "void" make clean it's nothing while "discard"
could
be a real (probably boolean) variable IMO
$void does sound good if you think of java methods with void return type.
Or, more generally, a procedure rather than a function, which is actually
our use case for velocity.
Even if "void" can be used as a verb or even a boolean variable name (i.e.
a product's warranty status or whether to change it), it's less common than
"discard".
I would be +0.5 for $void.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson
<aj(a)member.fsf.org>
wrote:
> 2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
>>
>> On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
>>
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called from velocity, usually with something like:
>>>
>>> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
>>>
>>> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be
used. And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
>>>
>>> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't
end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
>
> 1. $discard
> 2. $discarded
> 3. $ignore
> 4. $ignored
> 5. $ok
> 6. $output
We can also think of:
7. $dummy (I always use this one)
8. $unused
How about:
9. $void
>
> But I don't have a strong opion about this.
>
>
>>> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and
lighter
on the total size of the wiki.
>>
>> The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments
it'll slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
>>
>> Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is better.
>>
>>> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
call".
They're all fine with me except $output.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
6:30 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Hi,
based on Edy's stats, I think the easier / faster way is to go for $discard
everywhere.
Guillaume
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Thomas
Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
I would add that "void" make clean it's nothing while "discard"
could
be a real (probably boolean) variable IMO
$void does sound good if you think of java methods with void return type.
Or, more generally, a procedure rather than a function, which is actually
our use case for velocity.
Even if "void" can be used as a verb or even a boolean variable name (i.e.
a product's warranty status or whether to change it), it's less common than
"discard".
I would be +0.5 for $void.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Andreas Jonsson
<aj(a)member.fsf.org>
wrote:
> 2011-11-10 08:05, Vincent Massol skrev:
>>
>> On Nov 10, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
>>
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called from velocity, usually with something like:
>>>
>>> #set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
>>>
>>> Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be
used. And everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
>>>
>>> I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't
end up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do
you prefer:
>>
>> 1. $discard
>> 2. $discarded
>> 3. $ignore
>> 4. $ignored
>> 5. $ok
>> 6. $output
>
> We can also think of:
>
> 7. $dummy (I always use this one)
> 8. $unused
How about:
9. $void
+1, that's what I'm using usually too
>
> But I don't have a strong opion about this.
>
>
>>> $ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and
lighter
on the total size of the wiki.
>>
>> The size is definitely a bad argument. Let's remove all comments
it'll slim down the wiki size… yeah! :)
>>
>> Faster to type is also not a good argument. Using meaningful variable
names is better.
>>
>>> On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method
call".
>
> They're all fine with me except $output.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> devs(a)xwiki.org
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
9:13 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called
from velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end
up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you
prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
+1 for $discard or $dummy.
$ok and $output are really bad imo. They are too generic and don't explain
the fact that the output is not used later on.
Thanks,
Florin Ciubotaru
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter on
the total size of the wiki. On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's
more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the
output of this method call".
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
______________________________**_________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/**mailman/listinfo/devs<http://lists.xwiki.org/ma…
11 Nov
11 Nov
1:23 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Love Parkinson's law of triviality.
$discard is fine with me since it seems to get the most use.
Caleb
On 11/10/2011 01:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called from
velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end up
creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter on the total size
of the wiki. On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's more meaningful, it
conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the output of this method call".
14 Nov
14 Nov
12:01 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:23 AM, Caleb James DeLisle <
calebdelisle(a)lavabit.com> wrote:
Love Parkinson's law of triviality.
:-)
I think that over the years I've seen worse cases on this list though...
I'll try to dig them out some day.
Guillaume
$discard is fine with me since it seems to get the
most use.
Caleb
On 11/10/2011 01:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when
called
from velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used.
And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok,
$ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end
up creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you
prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter
on the
total size of the wiki. On the other hand, I prefer $discard since
it's more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the
output of this method call".
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
12:30 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi,
I'm struggling with adding a google map to an xwiki page using javascript.
Below is the code I'm using which does not work. It's not easy to see where
the problem is.
{{html clean="false" wiki="false"}}
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></scr…
<script type="text/javascript" id="script">
var tableid = 297050;
var map;
function initialize() {
map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById('map_canvas'), {
center: new google.maps.LatLng(37.4, -122.1),
zoom: 10,
mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
});
var layer = new google.maps.FusionTablesLayer({
query: {
select: 'Address',
from: tableid
},
map: map
});
}
</script>
<script>
window.onload=initialize();
</script>
HELLO
<table><tr><td width="400" height="400">
<div id="map_canvas" style="width:100%;
height:100%"></div>
</td></tr></table>
{{/html}}
The page can be viewed Today (14/11/2011) on
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/MapJavaScript
Username: guest password guest123
The html page I am trying to display is shown here:
http://gmaps-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/fusiontables/fusiontableslayer
_example.html
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks
Riaz
15 Nov
15 Nov
1:28 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi,
You could check
http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Map+Macro
Thanks
-Vincent
On Nov 14, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Riaz Shafi wrote:
Hi,
I'm struggling with adding a google map to an xwiki page using javascript.
Below is the code I'm using which does not work. It's not easy to see where
the problem is.
{{html clean="false" wiki="false"}}
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></scr…
<script type="text/javascript" id="script">
var tableid = 297050;
var map;
function initialize() {
map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById('map_canvas'), {
center: new google.maps.LatLng(37.4, -122.1),
zoom: 10,
mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
});
var layer = new google.maps.FusionTablesLayer({
query: {
select: 'Address',
from: tableid
},
map: map
});
}
</script>
<script>
window.onload=initialize();
</script>
HELLO
<table><tr><td width="400" height="400">
<div id="map_canvas" style="width:100%;
height:100%"></div>
</td></tr></table>
{{/html}}
The page can be viewed Today (14/11/2011) on
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/MapJavaScript
Username: guest password guest123
The html page I am trying to display is shown here:
http://gmaps-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/fusiontables/fusiontableslayer
_example.html
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks
Riaz
16 Nov
16 Nov
3:43 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi Riaz,
The clean approach is to put the JavaScript code in a
JavaScriptExtension (see
http://platform.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/DevGuide/SkinExtensionsTutorial#HM…
) and leave only the HTML in the page content.
Hope this helps,
Marius
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Riaz Shafi <riaz_shafi(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I'm struggling with adding a google map to an xwiki page using javascript.
Below is the code I'm using which does not work. It's not easy to see where
the problem is.
{{html clean="false" wiki="false"}}
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></scr…
<script type="text/javascript" id="script">
var tableid = 297050;
var map;
function initialize() {
map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById('map_canvas'), {
center: new google.maps.LatLng(37.4, -122.1),
zoom: 10,
mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
});
var layer = new google.maps.FusionTablesLayer({
query: {
select: 'Address',
from: tableid
},
map: map
});
}
</script>
<script>
window.onload=initialize();
</script>
HELLO
<table><tr><td width="400" height="400">
<div id="map_canvas" style="width:100%;
height:100%"></div>
</td></tr></table>
{{/html}}
The page can be viewed Today (14/11/2011) on
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/MapJavaScript
Username: guest password guest123
The html page I am trying to display is shown here:
http://gmaps-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/fusiontables/fusiontableslayer
_example.html
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks
Riaz
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
22 Nov
22 Nov
12:43 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi,
I have followed the javascriptExtension example.
I can execute the javascript when I have "Always on this page" selected
(simple alert("HELLO"); command)
The problem I have is executing the javascript on demand.
Using the following code I cannot execute the javascript on demand.
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("<space>.<javascript
Name>"){{/velocity}}
Is there anything else that I need to do? I have followed the javascript
example verbatim and tried executing the following code but no success:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("XWiki.MyFirstJavascriptExtension"){{/velocity}}
Any ideas?
Thanks
Riaz
-----Original Message-----
From: devs-bounces(a)xwiki.org [mailto:devs-bounces@xwiki.org] On Behalf Of
Marius Dumitru Florea
Sent: 16 November 2011 14:44
To: XWiki Developers
Subject: Re: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi Riaz,
The clean approach is to put the JavaScript code in a
JavaScriptExtension (see
http://platform.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/DevGuide/SkinExtensionsTutorial#HMi
nimalJavaScripteXtension
) and leave only the HTML in the page content.
Hope this helps,
Marius
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Riaz Shafi <riaz_shafi(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I'm struggling with adding a google map to an xwiki page using javascript.
Below is the code I'm using which does not work. It's not easy to see
where
the problem is.
{{html clean="false" wiki="false"}}
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></scr…
<script type="text/javascript" id="script">
var tableid = 297050;
var map;
function initialize() {
map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById('map_canvas'), {
center: new google.maps.LatLng(37.4, -122.1),
zoom: 10,
mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
});
var layer = new google.maps.FusionTablesLayer({
query: {
select: 'Address',
from: tableid
},
map: map
});
}
</script>
<script>
window.onload=initialize();
</script>
HELLO
<table><tr><td width="400" height="400">
<div id="map_canvas" style="width:100%;
height:100%"></div>
</td></tr></table>
{{/html}}
The page can be viewed Today (14/11/2011) on
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/MapJavaScript
Username: guest password guest123
The html page I am trying to display is shown here:
http://gmaps-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/fusiontables/fusiontableslayer
_example.html
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks
Riaz
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
3:51 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Riaz Shafi <riaz_shafi(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I have followed the javascriptExtension example.
I can execute the javascript when I have "Always on this page" selected
(simple alert("HELLO"); command)
The problem I have is executing the javascript on demand.
Using the following code I cannot execute the javascript on demand.
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("<space>.<javascript Name>"){{/velocity}}
It should be:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("<space>.<NameOfThePageThatHoldsTheJSXObject>"){{/velocity}}
So don't use the value of the "Name" property of the
JavaScriptExtension object. Use the name of the page holding the
object.
While debugging you can use:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("Space.Page", {'minify':
false}){{/velocity}}
so that you can easily put breakpoints and debug your code with tools
like Firebug.
Is there anything else that I need to do? I have followed the javascript
example verbatim and tried executing the following code but no success:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("XWiki.MyFirstJavascriptExtension"){{/velocity}}
Any ideas?
It should work if XWiki.MyFirstJavascriptExtension is the wiki page
that has the JavaScriptExtension object with your JavaScript code.
Hope this helps,
Marius
Thanks
Riaz
-----Original Message-----
From: devs-bounces(a)xwiki.org [mailto:devs-bounces@xwiki.org] On Behalf Of
Marius Dumitru Florea
Sent: 16 November 2011 14:44
To: XWiki Developers
Subject: Re: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi Riaz,
The clean approach is to put the JavaScript code in a
JavaScriptExtension (see
http://platform.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/DevGuide/SkinExtensionsTutorial#HMi
nimalJavaScripteXtension
) and leave only the HTML in the page content.
Hope this helps,
Marius
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Riaz Shafi <riaz_shafi(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I'm struggling with adding a google map to an xwiki page using javascript.
Below is the code I'm using which does not work. It's not easy to see
where
the problem is.
{{html clean="false" wiki="false"}}
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></scr…
<script type="text/javascript" id="script">
var tableid = 297050;
var map;
function initialize() {
map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById('map_canvas'), {
center: new google.maps.LatLng(37.4, -122.1),
zoom: 10,
mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
});
var layer = new google.maps.FusionTablesLayer({
query: {
select: 'Address',
from: tableid
},
map: map
});
}
</script>
<script>
window.onload=initialize();
</script>
HELLO
<table><tr><td width="400" height="400">
<div id="map_canvas" style="width:100%;
height:100%"></div>
</td></tr></table>
{{/html}}
The page can be viewed Today (14/11/2011) on
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/MapJavaScript
Username: guest password guest123
The html page I am trying to display is shown here:
http://gmaps-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/fusiontables/fusiontableslayer
_example.html
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks
Riaz
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
5 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Thanks Marius,
I understand now.
Thanks
Riaz
-----Original Message-----
From: devs-bounces(a)xwiki.org [mailto:devs-bounces@xwiki.org] On Behalf Of
Marius Dumitru Florea
Sent: 22 November 2011 14:52
To: XWiki Developers
Subject: Re: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Riaz Shafi <riaz_shafi(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
http://gmaps-samples.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/fusiontables/fusiontableslayer
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi,
I have followed the javascriptExtension example.
I can execute the javascript when I have "Always on this page" selected
(simple alert("HELLO"); command)
The problem I have is executing the javascript on demand.
Using the following code I cannot execute the javascript on demand.
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("<space>.<javascript Name>"){{/velocity}}
It should be:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("<space>.<NameOfThePageThatHoldsTheJSXObject>"){{
/velocity}}
So don't use the value of the "Name" property of the
JavaScriptExtension object. Use the name of the page holding the
object.
While debugging you can use:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("Space.Page", {'minify':
false}){{/velocity}}
so that you can easily put breakpoints and debug your code with tools
like Firebug.
Is there anything else that I need to do? I have followed the javascript
example verbatim and tried executing the following code but no success:
{{velocity}}$xwiki.jsx.use("XWiki.MyFirstJavascriptExtension"){{/velocity}}
Any ideas?
It should work if XWiki.MyFirstJavascriptExtension is the wiki page
that has the JavaScriptExtension object with your JavaScript code.
Hope this helps,
Marius
Thanks
Riaz
-----Original Message-----
From: devs-bounces(a)xwiki.org [mailto:devs-bounces@xwiki.org] On Behalf Of
Marius Dumitru Florea
Sent: 16 November 2011 14:44
To: XWiki Developers
Subject: Re: [xwiki-devs] {{html}} tag using JavaScript
Hi Riaz,
The clean approach is to put the JavaScript code in a
JavaScriptExtension (see
http://platform.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/DevGuide/SkinExtensionsTutorial#HMi
nimalJavaScripteXtension
) and leave only the HTML in the page content.
Hope this helps,
Marius
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Riaz Shafi <riaz_shafi(a)hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm struggling with adding a google map to an xwiki page using
javascript.
Below is the
code I'm using which does not work. It's not easy to see
where
the problem is.
{{html clean="false" wiki="false"}}
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></scr…
<script type="text/javascript" id="script">
var tableid = 297050;
var map;
function initialize() {
map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById('map_canvas'), {
center: new google.maps.LatLng(37.4, -122.1),
zoom: 10,
mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
});
var layer = new google.maps.FusionTablesLayer({
query: {
select: 'Address',
from: tableid
},
map: map
});
}
</script>
<script>
window.onload=initialize();
</script>
HELLO
<table><tr><td width="400" height="400">
<div id="map_canvas" style="width:100%;
height:100%"></div>
</td></tr></table>
{{/html}}
The page can be viewed Today (14/11/2011) on
http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/MapJavaScript
Username: guest password guest123
The html page I am trying to display is shown here:
_example.html
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks
Riaz
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
11 Nov
11 Nov
10:01 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Codestyle convention: variable used for discarding output
+1 for $discard
Thanks,
Marius
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
Hi devs,
Some methods must be captured so that they don't create output when called
from velocity, usually with something like:
#set ($var = $obj.doSomething())
Where $var is a variable whose content isn't needed and won't be used. And
everyone seems to have his favorite name for it: $discard, $ok, $ignore...
I'd like to have a single variable name, so that in the end we don't end up
creating 5 different variables for the same goal. So, which one do you
prefer:
1. $discard
2. $discarded
3. $ignore
4. $ignored
5. $ok
6. $output
$ok is the shortest, thus easier to type, faster to parse, and lighter on
the total size of the wiki. On the other hand, I prefer $discard since it's
more meaningful, it conveys exactly what that line does: "$discard the
output of this method call".
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
4682
days inactive
4694
days old
22 comments
12 participants
participants (12)
-
Andreas Jonsson -
Caleb James DeLisle -
Denis Gervalle -
Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) -
Eduard Moraru -
Florin Ciubotaru -
Guillaume Lerouge -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Riaz Shafi -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol