ctubbsii commented on issue #3771:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/issues/3771#issuecomment-3309182914

   > > I tried to ignore the warnings from this, using `-Xlint:-processing`, 
and it doesn't seem to work. Are these warnings coming out differently than 
other annotation processor warnings?
   > > Here’s a clearer, more precise version you could use:
   > 
   > `-Xlint:-processing` only disables javac’s own diagnostics about the 
annotation processing infrastructure: for example, when you supply an unused 
`-A...` option, or when a processor that could consume that option never runs 
because there are no matching annotations.
   > 
   > Warnings emitted _by_ annotation processors themselves (via 
`Messager.printMessage`) are independent of `-Xlint` and will still appear.
   
   I think I saw warnings with the unused `-A` option on the multi-module 
project (even with `-Xlint:-processing`, though that might need further 
debugging), and also when we didn't set it. Both caused `maven-compiler-plugin` 
to exit and fail our build. So, setting it didn't work, and neither did leaving 
it unset. I think it's probably relevant that we use a multi-module Maven 
project, with a common (relatively simple) maven-compiler-plugin configuration 
at the root. Other annotation processors, like the PluginProcessor, seems to 
silently succeed as a NOOP when run on modules that don't contain relevant 
annotations. The GraalVMProcessor, is much noisier, and causes build failures. 
However, we depend on the autodiscovery of processors for errorprone, so we 
can't enumerate all the processors and exclude GraalVMProcessor from our 
enumeration. (See our workaround in apache/accumulo#5890, which introduces some 
undesired complexity)


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to