JnRouvignac

6 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   Fixed.
2. 2.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   Thanks for reporting. Actually the comment is wrong in that case using BigDecimal.valueOf() is better since it could reuse the immutable object, so that is better for memory. I'll rework the samples to make it more explicit.
3. 3.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   I am not a fan of Jackpot. Such DSLs are hard to build to keep expressiveness, and yet, they remain hard to use for the user. I am a lot more enthusiastic about the approach taken by Refaster.
4. 4.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   I agree the drawbacks equally apply to GCC. I agree a simple compiler does not need an IR. Some compiler optimisations cannot exist without an IR. However I was wondering where a refactoring tool would need an IR. I found one: a CFG. For th
5. 5.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   Interesting question. What would prevent this to happen indeed? One reason I can think of is that for GCC all input languages are converted to the same intermediate representation (IR). From there, it's easy to apply the same optimisat
6. 6.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   Thanks, I am reading many things about good code and I have never seen such advice. "Good style", "best practice", all of this comes from an observation made by somebody who can justify it is good practice by some real e
7. 7.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   Ok that could work then. Do you mind trying Lombok + AutoRefactor please?
8. 8.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   Do you expect AutoRefactor to work with code using Lombok? I did not try, but I don't expect so. Why? Because AFAIK, Lombok enabled code is not valid java code. So I don't expect that Eclipse JDT (basis for AutoRefactor) will be a
9. 9.▲
   by JnRouvignac 11y ago

   That's a good question. I can explain for me: why do I fix the code like this? I spend a lot of time reading code to understand it, fix bugs, add features. Sometimes I read code and realize it is unnecessarily complicated, written in a
10. 10.▲
    by JnRouvignac 11y ago

    I am trying to understand your point but I fail. Why should there always be a else to an if-elseif? Secondly, in the original if-else, the if in the else clause does not have a else. Why is it not a problem for you? It seems contradictory..
11. 11.▲
    by JnRouvignac 11y ago

    Thanks for the reference. I'll have a look.
12. 12.▲
    by JnRouvignac 11y ago

    I am happy if it helps you too
13. 13.▲
    by JnRouvignac 11y ago

    Which ones?
14. 14.▲
    by JnRouvignac 11y ago

    I am the author of AutoRefactor. If you only need multi-catch refactorings and have never seen the other pieces of code, then you are the luckiest Java developer I have heard off. You are probably working on a green field project with a sma
15. 15.▲
    by JnRouvignac 11y ago

    Thanks! I will take a look.