Thanks to Byron for taking the time to code something useful.
Given the large amount of code with ragged right braces (more often
than not badly misaligned), I'm all for symmetric, consistent braces,
which leverage the innate abilities of the human brain to see
symmetry, as compared with the semi-random ragged-right disorganized
mess that is the alternative. Why is symmetry good in architecture,
art, photography, and faces, but somehow inappropriate with code?
IMO, comments on brace style are a waste of everyone's time, and
until such time as code reviews push back on the mess we already
have, Byron's clean, readable style is a breath of fresh air.
Lloyd
(recently dealing with multi-generational nastily-formatted admin code)
On Oct 30, 2006, at 7:18 PM, Byron Nevins wrote:
>
>
> Bill Shannon wrote:
>> Byron Nevins wrote:
>>> This is a new utility class. It is designed for taking the
>>> drudgery out of attaching threads to stdout and stderr of
>>> processes created in java.
>>
>> Sure would be nice if it followed our coding conventions...
> Is there something besides the placement of opening curly braces?
> I can't code with them placed raggedly as per the convention. But
> I *can* check it in that way when I'm done.
>>
>> There seems to be no synchronization of the objects shared between
>> the
>> worker threads and the calling thread.
> There are no shared objects, or at least there is no shared
> changing of objects. I don't see any potential problems. Do you
> see a problem???
>>
>> None of the output streams opened are ever closed.
> good point. It is impossible/messy to do it perfectly, though,
> because once the caller starts draining he may never call back in
> (e.g. waitFor()).
> A better solution is to not create Streams. I've fixed this
> problem by removing the methods that take File objects. The caller
> will have to create an OutputStream for a File and then pass that
> in instead. The caller is then responsible for closing the stream.
>
>>
>> If I ask for stdout and stderr, I think I want them interleaved in
>> time,
>> not accumulated separately and concatenated.
> It's too difficult/messy to do that. The caller can instead
> create the process with ProcessBuilder, use
> ProcessBuilder.redirectErrorStream() and then grab the stdout
> String (getOut()) for interleaved output.
>
>>
>> The example in the javadocs uses different method names.
> Oops. Fixed.
>>
>> Rather than creating threads directly, should it be using an
>> Executor?
> Maybe if I had remembered that such a thing exists :-) . I'll look
> into it...
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>