On 21/02/11 19:28, Andreas Delmelle wrote: > On 21 Feb 2011, at 19:15, Vincent Hennebert wrote: > >> If we solve issues raised by FindBugs by listing them in an ignore file, >> is there still a point to use FindBugs at all? >> >> It seems to me that some of those issues deserve to be fixed. They seem >> to point out genuine problems in the code. > > I was about to convey a similar sentiment. > > If we are only going to ignore potential bugs, the point of the whole > exercise seems totally lost. > > Some of them may be OK to ignore, as Glenn pointed out, but IIUC, one of > those potentially introduced bugs (that we are now ignoring) is likely of the > same nature as one that Chris fixed in the very same area a while back > (potentially unclosed stream, leading to a descriptor leak in the AFP > renderer)... Not very encouraging. :( > > Mea culpa: > I saw one exclusion --unconfirmed cast-- that would seem to stem from my > recent refactoring in the BlockStackingLMs. Not sure why an exclusion was > chosen here, but adding an assert statement in the code avoids the warning as > well *and* has the benefit of being visible exactly at the spot in the code > where it applies. Seemed like the more proper way to handle this.
Did you remove the corresponding entry from the findbugs-exclude.xml file before running FindBugs again? > Just my 2 cents... > > > Regards, > > Andreas Vincent
