On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux@gmx.de> wrote:

Hello Mariano,

sorry for the late reply, I have been busy  the last weeks.

Am 2009-03-03 um 23:08 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck:

[…]

Sorry. What's what you don't understand ? I dont' understand what you didn't understand hahaaha. I give you an exampple (the firstone I found):

<code>
executeDDLScript: aDDLScript
"Its very common you need to execute a complete DDL script: create, drop or alter tables. In these cases, you don't have any interesting results from each query. In such a case, you should use this method. Remember SqueakDBX doesn't do any translation so your statement delimiter must be understood by the backend. In order to know which delimiter we use, you can see the message queryDelimiter of the current platform backend, for example DBXPostgresPlatform.
This message doesn't use the multistatements option of openDBX, it is all done by SqueakDBX so you don't have to care about it''"

   | ddlStatements |
   ddlStatements := aDDLScript findTokens: self platform queryDelimiter.
   ddlStatements
       do: [:ddlStatement | self execute: ddlStatement]
 </code>

So, now I get it. In fact, I understood your question the way, that you put empty comments
into your code, as in:

aMessage
       ""

       self anotherMessage; aThirdMessage: true.


Which would not make sense to me.
 Regarding your example method, in my humble opinion, this is a large methos even though
it is long only due its comment. I (or wie in that case) as SwaLint developers thought that
7 lines average in a class would fit smalltalk style and should cope with small getter/setters
and rather lagre initializer.
 Well, I presume this average wouldnt fit for you, so simply change it in the preferences. In
fact, it is merely a matter of taste and/or style, so don't hesitate to change if it don't fit for you.

[…]

> Ok, this might be useful. Did I got this right there? You'd like to right click on the test group and browse all of them?

EXACTLY. I don't know if was just me, but actually that was my way of resolving the issues. Go test after test, and browsing for each one all the classes. Perhaps, I am the only one, so, It just doesn't worth it.

I consider it a useful feature. Yet, currently my time to work on SwaLint is fairly limitied,
so please dont expect it before summer.

>> 4) What does "Dot after return consistency" mean ? I don't understand the % and when it is average, low or high.
>
> Oh that's a nice one :)
> This is a Style tests. It simply tests, how many returns are written
>
>  ^ anObject aMessage
>
> and how many are written
>
> ^ anObject aMessage.

> Where 100% is "all with" and 0% "all without" dot after return.
> Thus, 50% is the worst value you can get in this test, as it implies, that every second return statement
> is written in the opposing style.

and are there some differences between both ways? I mean, a real difference ? or just to do it the same way in all the code ?

The latter. Its "just" about style consistency.

Have a nice weekend,
       -Tobias