-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Style Guide update #3122
Open
gkepka
wants to merge
3
commits into
scala:main
Choose a base branch
from
gkepka:style-guide-overview
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Style Guide update #3122
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,33 +1,49 @@ | ||
--- | ||
layout: style-guide | ||
title: Control Structures | ||
|
||
partof: style | ||
overview-name: "Style Guide" | ||
|
||
overview-name: Style Guide | ||
num: 7 | ||
|
||
previous-page: declarations | ||
next-page: method-invocation | ||
--- | ||
|
||
All control structures should be written with a space following the | ||
defining keyword: | ||
|
||
// right! | ||
if (foo) bar else baz | ||
for (i <- 0 to 10) { ... } | ||
while (true) { println("Hello, World!") } | ||
|
||
// wrong! | ||
if(foo) bar else baz | ||
for(i <- 0 to 10) { ... } | ||
while(true) { println("Hello, World!") } | ||
|
||
defining keyword. In Scala 3 parentheses around the condition should be omitted: | ||
|
||
{% tabs control_structures_1 class=tabs-scala-version%} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 2' for=control_structures_1 %} | ||
```scala | ||
// right! | ||
if (foo) bar else baz | ||
for (i <- 0 to 10) { ... } | ||
while (true) { println("Hello, World!") } | ||
|
||
// wrong! | ||
if(foo) bar else baz | ||
for(i <- 0 to 10) { ... } | ||
while(true) { println("Hello, World!") } | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 3' for=control_structures_1 %} | ||
```scala | ||
// right! | ||
if foo then bar else baz | ||
for i <- 0 to 10 do ... | ||
while true do println("Hello, World!") | ||
|
||
// wrong! | ||
if(foo) bar else baz | ||
for(i <- 0 to 10) do ... | ||
while(true) do println("Hello, World!") | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% endtabs %} | ||
|
||
## Curly-Braces | ||
|
||
Curly-braces should be omitted in cases where the control structure | ||
In Scala 3 using curly-braces is discouraged and the quiet syntax with significant indentation is favoured. | ||
In Scala 2, curly-braces should be omitted in cases where the control structure | ||
represents a pure-functional operation and all branches of the control | ||
structure (relevant to `if`/`else`) are single-line expressions. | ||
Remember the following guidelines: | ||
|
@@ -44,63 +60,84 @@ Remember the following guidelines: | |
|
||
<!-- necessary to separate the following example from the above bullet list --> | ||
|
||
val news = if (foo) | ||
goodNews() | ||
else | ||
badNews() | ||
|
||
if (foo) { | ||
println("foo was true") | ||
} | ||
|
||
news match { | ||
case "good" => println("Good news!") | ||
case "bad" => println("Bad news!") | ||
} | ||
{% tabs control_structures_2 class=tabs-scala-version%} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 2' for=control_structures_2 %} | ||
```scala | ||
val news = if (foo) | ||
goodNews() | ||
else | ||
badNews() | ||
|
||
if (foo) { | ||
println("foo was true") | ||
} | ||
|
||
news match { | ||
case "good" => println("Good news!") | ||
case "bad" => println("Bad news!") | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 3' for=control_structures_2 %} | ||
```scala | ||
val news = if foo then | ||
goodNews() | ||
else | ||
badNews() | ||
|
||
if foo then | ||
println("foo was true") | ||
|
||
news match | ||
case "good" => println("Good news!") | ||
case "bad" => println("Bad news!") | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% endtabs %} | ||
|
||
## Comprehensions | ||
|
||
Scala has the ability to represent `for`-comprehensions with more than | ||
one generator (usually, more than one `<-` symbol). In such cases, there | ||
are two alternative syntaxes which may be used: | ||
|
||
// wrong! | ||
for (x <- board.rows; y <- board.files) | ||
yield (x, y) | ||
|
||
// right! | ||
for { | ||
x <- board.rows | ||
y <- board.files | ||
} yield (x, y) | ||
{% tabs control_structures_3 class=tabs-scala-version%} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 2' for=control_structures_3 %} | ||
```scala | ||
// wrong! | ||
for (x <- board.rows; y <- board.files) | ||
yield (x, y) | ||
|
||
// right! | ||
for { | ||
x <- board.rows | ||
y <- board.files | ||
} yield (x, y) | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 3' for=control_structures_3 %} | ||
```scala | ||
// wrong! | ||
for x <- board.rows; y <- board.files | ||
yield (x, y) | ||
|
||
// right! | ||
for | ||
x <- board.rows | ||
y <- board.files | ||
yield (x, y) | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% endtabs %} | ||
|
||
While the latter style is more verbose, it is generally considered | ||
easier to read and more "scalable" (meaning that it does not become | ||
obfuscated as the complexity of the comprehension increases). You should | ||
prefer this form for all `for`-comprehensions of more than one | ||
generator. Comprehensions with only a single generator (e.g. | ||
`for (i <- 0 to 10) yield i`) should use the first form (parentheses | ||
`for i <- 0 to 10 yield i`) should use the first form (parentheses | ||
rather than curly braces). | ||
|
||
The exceptions to this rule are `for`-comprehensions which lack a | ||
`yield` clause. In such cases, the construct is actually a loop rather | ||
than a functional comprehension and it is usually more readable to | ||
string the generators together between parentheses rather than using the | ||
syntactically-confusing `} {` construct: | ||
Comment on lines
-85
to
-89
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I suggest to drop this since the arguments for using one-generator-per-line syntax hold no matter whether the next keyword is |
||
|
||
// wrong! | ||
for { | ||
x <- board.rows | ||
y <- board.files | ||
} { | ||
printf("(%d, %d)", x, y) | ||
} | ||
|
||
// right! | ||
for (x <- board.rows; y <- board.files) { | ||
printf("(%d, %d)", x, y) | ||
} | ||
|
||
Finally, `for` comprehensions are preferred to chained calls to `map`, | ||
`flatMap`, and `filter`, as this can get difficult to read (this is one | ||
of the purposes of the enhanced `for` comprehension). | ||
|
@@ -111,11 +148,22 @@ There are certain situations where it is useful to create a short | |
`if`/`else` expression for nested use within a larger expression. In | ||
Java, this sort of case would traditionally be handled by the ternary | ||
operator (`?`/`:`), a syntactic device which Scala lacks. In these | ||
situations (and really any time you have a extremely brief `if`/`else` | ||
situations (and really any time you have an extremely brief `if`/`else` | ||
expression) it is permissible to place the "then" and "else" branches on | ||
the same line as the `if` and `else` keywords: | ||
|
||
val res = if (foo) bar else baz | ||
{% tabs control_structures_4 class=tabs-scala-version%} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 2' for=control_structures_4 %} | ||
```scala | ||
val res = if (foo) bar else baz | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% tab 'Scala 3' for=control_structures_4 %} | ||
```scala | ||
val res = if foo then bar else baz | ||
``` | ||
{% endtab %} | ||
{% endtabs %} | ||
|
||
The key here is that readability is not hindered by moving both branches | ||
inline with the `if`/`else`. Note that this style should never be used | ||
|
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this claim might be too strong. How about something like: