I'd prefer "single issue with three patches". DIGY On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Andy Pook <andy.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Subscribed > > 1- Ah, hadn't spotted ISerializable. However, the recommendation for > combining ISerializable and sealed classes is to use private instead > of protected. ( > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms182343(VS.80).aspx > - "For a sealed class, make the constructor private; otherwise, make > it protected.") > > Should I create a separate issue for each or a single issue with three > patches? > > --Andy > > From "Digy" <digyd...@gmail.com> > Subject RE: Compiler warnings to worry about? > Date Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:06:39 GMT > Hi Andy, > > 1- No we can not remove the protected constructors. They are used in > serialization process via reflection. See the issue > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-338 . > > 2- You are correct in general, but no danger in this case > (SupportClass.ThreadClass) > > 3- Yes, we should add the override/new keyword. > > Your patch is welcome. > > PS: Please subscribe to mailing list to send mails. Otherwise I'll have to > do a allow/deny confirmation (as a moderator) with every mail you send and > it can get lost among spams. > > DIGY > > > > > On 18 February 2010 10:35, Andy Pook <andy.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > We get a lot of compiler warnings. This has been discussed before and the > result seemed to be that it would be a lot of effort and would make it > difficult to maintain across versions as we have previously always used the > automated process. And as most of them are just to do with xml comments it's > never been much to worry about. > > However, we do have some warnings that I think we should worry about. > > I normally compile using msbuild from the command line. This makes it > easier for me to ignore most of the warnings and just see the interesting > stuff. > > msbuild > -p:NoWarn="0168,0169,0414,0612,0618,0649,1572,1573,1574,1580,1587,1591" > > Other options are added for the Release build. > > Here are the warnings. (Forgive the line breaks, I just cut/pasted from > cmd). > > "C:\projects\lucene.net\trunk\src\Lucene.Net\Lucene.Net.sln" (default > target) (1) -> > > "C:\projects\lucene.net\trunk\src\Lucene.Net\Lucene.Net.csproj" (default > target) (2) -> > > (CoreCompile target) -> > > Index\Term.cs(174,19): warning CS0628: > 'Lucene.Net.Index.Term.Term(System.Run > > time.Serialization.SerializationInfo, > System.Runtime.Serialization.StreamingCon > > text)': new protected member declared in sealed class > > Search\NumericRangeQuery.cs(389,19): warning CS0628: > 'Lucene.Net.Search.Numer > > > icRangeQuery.NumericRangeQuery(System.Runtime.Serialization.SerializationInfo, > > System.Runtime.Serialization.StreamingContext)': new protected member > declared > > in sealed class > > SupportClass.cs(132,18): warning CS0659: 'SupportClass.ThreadClass' > overrides > > Object.Equals(object o) but does not override Object.GetHashCode() > > SupportClass.cs(132,18): warning CS0661: 'SupportClass.ThreadClass' > defines o > > perator == or operator != but does not override Object.GetHashCode() > > Analysis\CharArraySet.cs(449,29): warning CS0114: > 'Lucene.Net.Analysis.CharAr > > raySet.Clear()' hides inherited member > 'System.Collections.Hashtable.Clear()'. > > To make the current member override that implementation, add the override > keywo > > rd. Otherwise add the new keyword. > > Analysis\CharArraySet.cs(418,16): warning CS0114: > 'Lucene.Net.Analysis.CharAr > > raySet.UnmodifiableCharArraySet.AddAll(System.Collections.ICollection)' > hides i > > nherited member > 'Lucene.Net.Analysis.CharArraySet.AddAll(System.Collections.ICo > > llection)'. To make the current member override that implementation, add > the ov > > erride keyword. Otherwise add the new keyword. > > QueryParser\QueryParser.cs(1421,4): warning CS0162: Unreachable code > detected > > QueryParser\QueryParser.cs(1469,4): warning CS0162: Unreachable code > detected > > QueryParser\QueryParser.cs(1482,4): warning CS0162: Unreachable code > detected > > QueryParser\QueryParser.cs(1542,4): warning CS0162: Unreachable code > detected > > QueryParser\QueryParser.cs(1633,4): warning CS0162: Unreachable code > detected > > QueryParser\QueryParser.cs(1984,4): warning CS0162: Unreachable code > detected > > Search\Filter.cs(42,7): warning CS1570: XML comment on > 'Lucene.Net.Search.Fil > > ter.Bits(Lucene.Net.Index.IndexReader)' has badly formed XML -- 'A name > contain > > ed an invalid character.' > > Util\Version.cs(67,41): warning CS1570: XML comment on > 'Lucene.Net.Util.Versi > > on.LUCENE_29' has badly formed XML -- 'Whitespace is not allowed at this > locati > > on.' > > 14 Warning(s) > > The QueryParser ones we probably don't want to get into as it's generated > code (maybe for a later date). > > The CS1570 comment warnings > > That leaves 3 basic types of problem: > > > > CS0628 "New protected member declared in a sealed class" > > If a class is sealed, you cannot inherit from it, therefore there can be > no descendants to use it. The usual solution is make them private. > > Both of these warnings are constructors and don't seem to be referenced > from anywhere. > > Suggestion: Just remove them. > > CS0659 "Overrides Equals but not GetHashCode" > > Not doing this can lead to some unexpected consequences. especially is > the object is added to a collection that depends on hash codes. > > A GetHashCode can usually be fairly easily derived from the Equals. > > CS0114 "hides inherited member" > > This can lead to some weird consequences esp. if polymorphism is used. > > Added 'override' is almost always the right solution. > > > > I would consider these as fairly serious smells.I can't see any reason > why we should not fix these at this stage. I can provide patches if the > committers are interested. > > --Andy Pook >
