[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15364021#comment-15364021 ] Alex Petrov commented on CASSANDRA-11868: - [~appodictic] could you remove the annotation flag and unused constant changes and rebase? I assume you've used some automated tool for that, I would rebase myself otherwise. > unused imports and generic types > > > Key: CASSANDRA-11868 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Edward Capriolo >Assignee: Edward Capriolo > Fix For: 3.x > > > I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at > all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a > few cases. > 1) unused imports > 2) raw types missing <> > 3) case statements without defaults > 4) @resource annotation > My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to > signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was > done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these > for now. > I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some > questions: > 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches > 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15335667#comment-15335667 ] Alex Petrov commented on CASSANDRA-11868: - You're right, there's no overlap. I suggest to only do the import changes in this patch: no annotation flag changes or unused constant changes. If that's the largest problem there is right now. Having a separate patch for each problem will make it easier to look at the logs. We need to rebase and re-run tests now. Other than that - I like the change. > unused imports and generic types > > > Key: CASSANDRA-11868 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Edward Capriolo >Assignee: Edward Capriolo > Fix For: 3.8 > > > I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at > all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a > few cases. > 1) unused imports > 2) raw types missing <> > 3) case statements without defaults > 4) @resource annotation > My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to > signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was > done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these > for now. > I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some > questions: > 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches > 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15335213#comment-15335213 ] Edward Capriolo commented on CASSANDRA-11868: - I do not think 8385 is a blocker. I did not clean up abstract types in this ticket. I only cleaned imports and a few unused constants. > unused imports and generic types > > > Key: CASSANDRA-11868 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Edward Capriolo >Assignee: Edward Capriolo > Fix For: 3.8 > > > I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at > all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a > few cases. > 1) unused imports > 2) raw types missing <> > 3) case statements without defaults > 4) @resource annotation > My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to > signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was > done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these > for now. > I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some > questions: > 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches > 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15327297#comment-15327297 ] Alex Petrov commented on CASSANDRA-11868: - The only note I currently have is that I'd avoid supressing deprecation warnings. They might be helpful. Let's wait until the [8385|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8385] is merged in, rebase and test it thoroughly. > unused imports and generic types > > > Key: CASSANDRA-11868 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Edward Capriolo >Assignee: Edward Capriolo > Fix For: 3.8 > > > I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at > all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a > few cases. > 1) unused imports > 2) raw types missing <> > 3) case statements without defaults > 4) @resource annotation > My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to > signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was > done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these > for now. > I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some > questions: > 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches > 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15316052#comment-15316052 ] Edward Capriolo commented on CASSANDRA-11868: - Please check here: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/compare/trunk...edwardcapriolo:CASSANDRA-11868?expand=1 > unused imports and generic types > > > Key: CASSANDRA-11868 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Edward Capriolo >Assignee: Edward Capriolo > > I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at > all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a > few cases. > 1) unused imports > 2) raw types missing <> > 3) case statements without defaults > 4) @resource annotation > My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to > signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was > done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these > for now. > I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some > questions: > 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches > 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15296896#comment-15296896
]
Edward Capriolo commented on CASSANDRA-11868:
-
The case statements look like this:
{noformat}
switch (enum) {
case YES:
do yes stuff
break
case NO
do no stuff
beak
}
throw IllegalArgumentException("Thie compiler would rather have me in the
default")
{noformat}
> unused imports and generic types
>
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-11868
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Reporter: Edward Capriolo
>Assignee: Edward Capriolo
>
> I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at
> all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a
> few cases.
> 1) unused imports
> 2) raw types missing <>
> 3) case statements without defaults
> 4) @resource annotation
> My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to
> signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was
> done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these
> for now.
> I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some
> questions:
> 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches
> 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-11868) unused imports and generic types
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15296059#comment-15296059 ] Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-11868: -- bq. unused imports A patch that removes unused imports is great, but please make sure your IDE doesn't rewrite imports too (this quickly get obnoxious to review and tends to create conflicts with other patches, none of it being worth bothering about). bq. raw types missing <> I'll note that there is already CASSANDRA-8385 in the review stage that cleans up some of those, so that it's probably worth waiting for it to be dealt with and committed. bq. case statements without defaults This is going to be a matter of personal preference but I happen to think that this is fine, that sometimes you just don't need a default and forcing one to make IDEs happy is ... not great. Haven't ever seen a bug due to forgetting a default when you need one either for what it's worth. Anyway, I'd say let's just not do that, saving us some time in writing and reviewing it. But of course some will disagree and if a fair majority loves forcing defaults, so be it. bq. Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches That kind of changes almost always goes exclusively on trunk. bq. should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches With the caveat that I don't love 3 and think we should wait on CASSANDRA-8385 for 2, we'd want at least different commits. > unused imports and generic types > > > Key: CASSANDRA-11868 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11868 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Edward Capriolo >Assignee: Edward Capriolo > > I was going through Cassandra source and for busy work I started looking at > all the .java files eclipse flags as warning. They are broken roughly into a > few cases. > 1) unused imports > 2) raw types missing <> > 3) case statements without defaults > 4) @resource annotation > My IDE claims item 4 is not needed (it looks like we have done this to > signify methods that return objects that need to be closed) I can guess 4 was > done intentionally and short of making out own annotation I will ignore these > for now. > I would like to tackle this busy work before I get started. I have some > questions: > 1) Do this only on trunk? or multiple branches > 2) should I tackle 1,2,3 in separate branches/patches -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
