Hi Gary, IMHO FindBugs is supposed to point you at code fragments that potentially could cause subtle bugs. If say that the code in codec is carefully constructed and everything is backed up by junit tests, I'd say a default clause is nosy and doesn't add anything. OTOH if you can not see that no default clause is required at first sight, I would prefer a default clause in favor of a code comment.
Benedikt 2012/9/4 Gary Gregory <[email protected]>: > Hi All: > > FindBugs can give warnings like: > > Switch statement found in > org.apache.commons.codec.binary.Base32.decode(byte[], int, int, > BaseNCodec$Context) where default case is missing > > In this case for [codec], it looks like the code was carefully constructed > and that no default clause is needed. > > In these cases for any component, this FindBugs issue feels like a style > issue, is it worth changing the code to add a default clause like: > > default: > // ok to fall through for other values. > break; > > Or does this feel like noise to you all? > > Gary > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
