[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9394?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17130618#comment-17130618
]
Erick Erickson commented on LUCENE-9394:
----------------------------------------
re: Changing ValueSource context to Map<Object, Object>
Without really looking at the implications, we'll have to do some surgery like
this to really get rid of SuppressWarnings and I'm for it. I've seen a lot of
these in Solr code.
I also encourage everyone who uses IntelliJ to pay attention to the highlighted
code. Some of the inspections are trivial and I want to turn them off
personally. For instance, I like "if (something == false)" rather than "if (!
something)" but that's a nit.
IntelliJ inspections are relevant to your question though, since if this change
is made many of the suppressions in the Solr code will become obsolete, and
IntelliJ flags them.
While on the subject_,_ I'd also advise against letting IntelliJ fix issues, or
at least inspect the fix. IntelliJ fixes the _inspection_, which is different
than fixing compiler warnings. We can't restrict this to a particular IDE.
Hmmm, I feel another precommit check coming on...
> Fix or suppress compile-time warnings
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9394
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9394
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Michael Sokolov
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> This is a spinoff from [~erickerickson]'s efforts over in SOLR-10778
> The goal is a warning-free compilation, followed by enforcement of build
> failure on warnings, with the idea of suppressing innocuous warnings to the
> extent that the remaining warnings be treated as build failure.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
