Hi, We have quite a few warnings, it would be difficult to fix them at once. Checking one directory (or warning type) and handling 10-20 warnings at the same time seems more reasonable.
There are two umbrella jiras for that: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10778 and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7907 I have two jiras in patch-available status: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9323 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14266 Andras On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:28 PM Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > Gus: > > When it comes to actually removing the necessity of suppresswarnings > IntelliJ makes a lot of this much easier. The issue is that it’s too much > work for any one person to have a hope of doing in any reasonable period > without introducing errors. > > There are just too many warnings for one person to have a hope of thinking > carefully about all of them, so my strategy is to stop adding to the > problem, raise awareness when it happens etc. I think to remove the > necessity for SuppressWarnings will require extensive work, best approached > over time, not in a huge wodge. > > Best, > Erick > > > On May 11, 2020, at 9:25 AM, Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I typically battle warnings by conquering one file/directory at a > time... And letting Intellij take me from warning to warning with F2 key > really really really speeds things up. This is a wider set than compiler > warnings, but you can customize it, and many of the additional warnings are > auto-solvable (things like redundant initializers for variables that are > already assigned before use), so the extra work is more than paid for by > the reduction in transition time. The key one to think carefully about is > the one that wants to minimize access, which is great for new classes, > dangerous for released classes. Perhaps turn that warning off in > intellij... > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:14 AM Atri Sharma <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 to Erick’s proposal. > > > > I hate the number of warnings we get — we should still be formulating > some sort of a strategy to fix them. > > > > Atri > > > > On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 17:09, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Just disabling the warning globally nothing to prevent more being added. > Take raw types. They’re a compromise allowed by the java compiler > explicitly to be able to continue to use older binaries written before (or > without) generics. But take a look at SolrQueryResponse for instance. We > explicitly declare: > > > > protected NamedList<Object> values = new SimpleOrderedMap<>(); > > > > but then declare a method: > > > > public NamedList getValues() { return values; } > > > > This is just bad practice. > > > > I don’t mind the grunt work, keeps me from stupid surfing. I’m proposing > that I fix what’s easy, and suppress the rest. > > > > It might have been clearer if I’d said “Then start failing builds on any > new warnings of these types”. > > > > Oh, and I’m also thinking of changing my BadApple report to flag when > new SuppressWarnings are introduced and then nag people about new ones. > > > > > > > > > On May 10, 2020, at 11:43 PM, David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Can't we customize the linting to disregard entire categories of > certain warnings for now? This makes your task manageable. > > > https://discuss.gradle.org/t/recompile-with-xlint-parameters/25279 > > > > > > ~ David > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 10:41 PM Erick Erickson < > erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I’m really struggling with what to do with compiler warnings, > particularly all the rawtypes and unchecked warnings. > > > > > > On the one hand, the simple mechanical thing to do would be to > SuppressWarnings on each one that exists presently. Frankly that feels > pretty useless; that would preserve poor code forever. > > > > > > OTOH, actually _fixing_ the issues to not have, say, rawtypes is going > to be time consuming and error-prone. Especially since I don’t really > understand all the nuances yet and learning them one by one will introduce > serious errors without doubt. > > > > > > So here’s what I propose. Even though it feels useless, just > SuppressWarnings on anything that’s not a simple fix. Then start failing > builds on these warnings to catch any that come in in future. At least that > way there’ll be some incentive to keep the code from getting _worse_, > although people will still be able to just add SuppressWarnings to the mix > I suppose. > > > > > > The number of raw NamedList member variables we have is overwhelming > all by itself…. > > > > > > Comments? > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Atri > > Apache Concerted > > > > > > -- > > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) > > http://www.the111shift.com (play) > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
