Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I'll go ahead and merge this, good work. Thank you for the considerable
contribution.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
+1
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if th
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I've only got more compiler warnings that I'd like to fix before I give
this my +1.
I've submitted those in a PR for you:
https://github.com/tomatophantastico/metamodel/pull/1
---
If
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Can you open a PR for the checkstyle improvement then also? :-)
Btw. the 5.x branch is no longer in use really. We've merged it into master
as of #147.
I will take a look a
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I manually rearranged the imports.
To make things easier improve quality i also created a checkstyle
integration in
https://github.com/tomatophantastico/metamodel/tree/feature/c
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Other than the compiler warnings, the code looks good to me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I see a lot of unused imports on this branch:
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/291450/28855615-b8b8d6f6-76f2-11e7-8b4d-b96a8f251743.png)
---
If your project is set u
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Great. That makes sense. I expect to take a closer look at the diff
sometime this weekend.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on G
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
IIRC, guava is only in the test cases, so i would just set the scope to test
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as wel
Github user kaspersorensen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I also wanna applaude this big effort :-) But like @LosD I am a bit
concerned with adding Guava to the core module because that means our API and
really core classes essentially depends on
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Sorry, this was more of the reasoning behind my bulk changes & the changes
in the (im)mutable table class, the implementor should of course pick what fits
the scenario best.
---
If yo
Github user LosD commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I don't really agree on "ArrayLists should be used", especially for
single-element lists, as a singletonList does not need a backing array, but
it's not really a blocker for me.
---
If your project
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
w.r.t. guavas Lists.newArrayList()
I think i used it mainly in the testcases, purely for syntactic convenience.
Internally ArrayLists should be used as it allows for more fre
13 matches
Mail list logo