ions.
> * Add `-Xlint:-suppression` flags to `*.gmk` build files so the build doesn't
> break
>
> ยน The suppression of a lint category is "validated" as soon as it suppresses
> some warning in that category
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target
On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 16:33:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> Basically, if `@SuppressWarnings("suppression")` was accidentally left with
> no suppressions under it, the compiler would warn you, so you could remove
> it. Because what's the reason for `@SuppressWarnings("suppression")` whose
> scope c
On Tue, 23 Sep 2025 22:26:08 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> Thanks for this explanation. I can now see what you mean in the _Different
> Compiler Versions_ section of the CSR. That's some quality reasoning and
> future-proofing.
Credit goes to @jddarcy for pinpointing those possible traps.
> I sup
On Tue, 23 Sep 2025 21:02:03 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> While I've read the CSR, I haven't read any compiler-dev thread(s). At least
> not carefully. I also haven't seen the diff.
FWIW there is a discussion thread (starting
[here](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/compiler-dev/2024-November/02
On Tue, 23 Sep 2025 21:25:26 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> The reason I ask is that I can probably see how it could be useful to emit a
> "suppression" warning from this:
It's a reasonable option to consider. I think the main worry is that it could
complicate build situations where the same code w
On Sat, 10 May 2025 20:20:32 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> This PR adds a new compiler warning for `@SuppressWarnings` annotations that
> don't actually suppress any warnings.
>
> Summary of code changes:
>
> * Add new warning and associated lint category `"suppress
On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 18:58:41 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Hi @archiecobbs , are there bugs filed to clean the causes of the warnings?
Hi @jddarcy,
At the beginning of this project as a preliminary step I filed a bunch of
bugs+PR's to remove unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings` annotations. These were
a
This PR adds a new compiler warning for `@SuppressWarnings` annotations that
don't actually suppress any warnings.
Summary of code changes:
* Add new warning and associated lint category `"suppression"`
* Update `LintMapper` to keep track of which `@SuppressWarnings` suppressions
have been vali
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 19:47:03 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
> Multiple similar issues detected in PLATFORM_API_MacOSX_Ports.cpp more info
> about https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/62836
>
> jdk/src/java.desktop/macosx/native/libjsound/PLATFORM_API_MacOSX_Ports.cpp:127:39:
> error: varia
This PR is a prototype to stimulate discussion of
[JDK-8261669](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8261669), which seeks to add
more warnings when an implicit cast of a primitive value might lose
information. This can possibly happen when converting an `int` to `float`, or
when converting a `l
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 20:01:28 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
>
> This issue is a follow up to
> [JDK-8343476](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343476) to remove some
> additional warnings t
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 20:01:28 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
>
> This issue is a follow up to
> [JDK-8343476](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343476) to remove some
> additional warnings t
Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
annotations.
This issue is a follow up to
[JDK-8343476](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343476) to remove some
additional warnings that were missed in that issue.
-
Commit messages:
- Remove unnecessary @
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 15:22:15 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 8a1f9f0a
Author:Archie Cobbs
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 20:33:40 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
> There is good chance you will either want to do a follow-up of this PR, or
> re-run again against the latest master.
Indeed... just had to resolve some conflicts with recent changes.
As for now, all of the unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings` ha
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains eight commits:
- Remove more unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotations.
-
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
by the merge/rebase. The pull request co
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
by the merge/rebase. The pull request co
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
by the merge/rebase. The pull request co
Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
annotations.
-
Commit messages:
- Remove unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotations.
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21850/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=21850&range=00
Issue
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 18:52:16 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> The `Introspector` class was never updated to include `default` methods
>> inherited from interfaces.
>>
>> This patch attempts to fix that omission.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new
On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 21:29:05 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> The `Introspector` class was never updated to include `default` methods
> inherited from interfaces.
>
> This patch attempts to fix that omission.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 1e4eafb4
Author:
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 18:31:01 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
>> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Jam lines into 80 columns.
>> - Add more scenarios to the regression test.
>
&
> The `Introspector` class was never updated to include `default` methods
> inherited from interfaces.
>
> This patch attempts to fix that omission.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes t
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 18:14:05 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add braces around if clause.
>
> test/jdk/java/beans/Introspector/DefaultMetho
> The `Introspector` class was never updated to include `default` methods
> inherited from interfaces.
>
> This patch attempts to fix that omission.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- Jam lines int
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 17:30:56 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
>> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contain
> The `Introspector` class was never updated to include `default` methods
> inherited from interfaces.
>
> This patch attempts to fix that omission.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Add braces arou
On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 20:27:57 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> The `Introspector` class was never updated to include `default` methods
>> inherited from interfaces.
>>
>> This patch attempts to fix that omission.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new
29 matches
Mail list logo
