Bug 19811

Summary:	Code formatter bugs
Product:	[Eclipse Project] JDT	Reporter:	Adalbert Homa <adalbert.homa>
Component:	Core	Assignee:	Olivier Thomann <Olivier_Thomann>
Status:	VERIFIED FIXED	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P3
Version:	2.0
Target Milestone:	3.0 M4
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Windows NT
Whiteboard:

Description Adalbert Homa

2002-06-10 12:39:26 EDT

Eclipse code formatter should abide to Sun's Java code conventions. Most of the
time it does a good job, but at line splitting it has some problems.

I included examples of what I think are bugs:

        // Here is how it should look like acording to Java conventions
        // longName1 = longName2 * (longName3 + longName4 - longName5)
        //            + 4 * longname6; // PREFER
        // 
        // Here is Eclipse formatting
        longName1 =
            longName2 * (longName3 + longName4 - longName5) + 4 *
longName6;

        // Here is how it should look like
        // System.out.println("Server Name: " + serverName_ + ", port="
        //    + serverPort_ + ", numOrbs=" + numOrbs_);
        // 
        // Here is Eclipse formatting
        System.out.println(
            "Server Name: "
                + serverName_
                + ", port="
                + serverPort_
                + ", numOrbs="
                + numOrbs_);

    // 
    // Here is how I would format it (Sun's code converntions does not say)
    //    String[][] doubleList = {
    //            { "alfa", "beta" },
    //            { "alfa", "beta" },
    //            { "alfa", "beta" },
    //            { "alfa", "beta" },            
    //    };
    // 
    // Here is how Eclipse format it
    String[][] doubleList = { { "alfa", "beta" }, {
            "alfa", "beta" }, {
            "alfa", "beta" }, {
            "alfa", "beta" }, };

    // Method parameters formatting.
    // My formatting
    // protected void processRequest(long param1, long param2,long param3, 
    //     long param4) {
    // }
    //
    // Eclipse formatting
    protected void processRequest(
        long param1,
        long param2,
        long param3,
        long param4) {
    }

Comment 1 Philipe Mulet

2002-06-10 12:45:39 EDT

Thanks, will consider post 2.0

Comment 2 Philipe Mulet

2002-07-25 06:30:52 EDT

Resurrecting formatter issues in 2.1 stream.

Comment 3 Philipe Mulet

2002-07-25 06:32:40 EDT

Clearing resolution

Comment 4 Olivier Thomann

2003-01-15 13:22:45 EST

We need to clear 2.1 bug reports that won't be addressed before 2.1. The new 
implementation is still in the works. Therefore we cannot include it for 2.1. 
Not enough testing and we need to polish the preferences. This will be address 
for 2.2 as stated in the JDT/Core plan.

Comment 5 Philipe Mulet

2003-06-12 06:36:23 EDT

Resurrecting for 3.0

Comment 6 Olivier Thomann

2003-06-12 15:59:08 EDT

Reopen for 3.0 consideration.

Comment 7 Olivier Thomann

2003-10-03 09:57:31 EDT

This is improved with the new formatter.
Fixed and released in HEAD.

Comment 8 David Audel

2003-10-13 10:24:22 EDT

Verified.