Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPMys85q6dCX0C=o2axb9UakWcEo-LMrg6DYsuMPG6NQzJ5V0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPMys86z7EWSCFnbV8j4uwmJ4b30tpmQj2c1uEuFkNRq0PCFRg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACmp6kpcFjXgwxOYqgdFReZC05CNKkG_2o4pvVn_3tDQ2ROY=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP0y3Qd4aPZUmS1LkqKhr3xiBb+vwt2CPsrN7KAv+CqqEG073Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACZkXPwcQE_bDjMooSqssffRAsmJMPjHQkea_PwX3u-st6CcwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPMys85_xNnfTkv5YKzbrY7sRA7nxFSaad5RXNss91yU4wuRsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACmp6krDZ+e0y9t_RzBFEq6wPjDcRtbE3t67N1q8ihaDk-u09Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPMys84-c2KWHur98dG6nbe256e+gwM19M7JMWnKL-TzHfdFSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPMys84H1nqtmhYfywkLQVk8SveX0qt+Qzv=y-yOKui4nGdkQQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACZkXPyeqQLM6=P_cLwU5XRkM2VnFTZbnKhxcn8yFFOLXWgVgw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPMys85q6dCX0C=o2axb9UakWcEo-LMrg6DYsuMPG6NQzJ5V0w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 20:33:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CACmp6konLHrAEqiSu-oJj4o=bUAqFeVk02wb2EkhUr7yXr1zGA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lang] Applying IntelliJ IDEA refactorings
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113c457600fd070553ec9124"
archived-at: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 01:49:59 -0000

--001a113c457600fd070553ec9124
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I personally don't see the point of making a jira issue for it.

On 9 July 2017 at 20:19, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <jbluettduncan@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Okay, thanks for the clarification Gary.
>
> Does this mean, by extension, that there's no need to create a new JIRA
> issue? In other words, would just a new GitHub PR be fine (at least for
> now)?
>
> Jonathan
>
> On 10 July 2017 at 01:32, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would think an ICLA is not needed if the only thing we are talking
> about
> > are clean-up style refactoring.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <
> > jbluettduncan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I've re-read the contribution guidelines
> > > <https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md>,
> > but
> > > it's not clear to me if my changes are non-trivial enough to warrant a
> > new
> > > JIRA issue.
> > >
> > > Can someone advise me on this?
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > > On 6 July 2017 at 00:51, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <
> jbluettduncan@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Okay, I don't intend to apply any `@SuppressWarnings` during my
> > > > refactoring efforts - if IntelliJ still reports warnings after my
> > > efforts,
> > > > then I can live with that. :)
> > > >
> > > > Jonathan
> > > >
> > > > On 6 July 2017 at 00:31, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> The only thing I can think of that conflicts sometimes with IDEA
> > versus
> > > >> Eclipse are custom @SupressWarnings strings causing warnings in
> > Eclipse.
> > > >> The default IntelliJ warnings tend to be simple things that wouldn't
> > > cause
> > > >> an issue, however, based in my experience. It's only some of the
> > > advanced
> > > >> inspections that can get strange.
> > > >>
> > > >> On 5 July 2017 at 17:24, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <
> > > jbluettduncan@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Great! Sounds like there's general agreement on me pursuing at
> least
> > > >> some
> > > >> > of these refactorings, right?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On the subject of code style guidelines, AFAIK [lang] uses
> > Checkstyle
> > > to
> > > >> > check style adherence? So I assume that if the corresponding Maven
> > > goal
> > > >> > passes after a refactoring, then it's okay to submit it as a
> GitHub
> > > PR.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I don't expect changes suggested by IDEA to cause warnings/errors
> in
> > > >> > Eclipse or for the Eclipse Java compiler either. Is there an
> > automated
> > > >> way
> > > >> > to explicitly check for things like this through Apache's
> > > >> infrastructure?
> > > >> > Or would I need to manually download Eclipse and check on my
> > machine?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I've already created an Apache JIRA account and signed the CLA,
> but
> > > now
> > > >> > it's not clear to me what to do next. Can someone kindly advise me
> > on
> > > >> the
> > > >> > next step?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Jonathan
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On 5 July 2017 at 20:33, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Keep in mind that not all of us use IDEA. For example, I am on
> > > >> Eclipse. I
> > > >> > > do not think this should be an issue for any of these changes
> > > thougg.
> > > >> I
> > > >> > do
> > > >> > > not expect that changes from IDEA warnings would cause the
> Eclipse
> > > >> Java
> > > >> > > compiler to issue warnings, and vice-versa.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Gary
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Jul 5, 2017 12:23, "Allon Mureinik" <mureinik@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > I've submitted several such cleanups over the past couple of
> > > month,
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > for
> > > >> > > > the most part, they've been well received.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I think the key here is to improve the codebase when possible
> > but
> > > to
> > > >> > > leave
> > > >> > > > room to deviate from IntelliJ's norms when there's a good
> reason
> > > to.
> > > >> > > > Perhaps annotating such places with @SuppressWarning would be
> > the
> > > >> best
> > > >> > > > approach, to signal to future developers that the warning was
> > > >> > considered,
> > > >> > > > and we explicitly decided to suppress it (possibly with a
> > comment
> > > in
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > > code explaining why).
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > I like the idea myself at least, though I'm not sure if it
> > > >> conflicts
> > > >> > > with
> > > >> > > > > any coding styleguides established.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On 4 July 2017 at 18:18, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan <
> > > >> > > jbluettduncan@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I'm interested in going through commons-lang with IntelliJ
> > > IDEA
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > > > > applying small refactorings to make the code base easier
> to
> > > read
> > > >> > > and/or
> > > >> > > > > > more performant (and also make IntelliJ IDEA itself report
> > > less
> > > >> > > > > warnings).
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Is this something that the [lang] team would find useful?
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Examples of refactorings that I could apply include:
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >    - Replace manual array-to-collection copy operations
> with
> > > >> > > > > >    `Collections.addAll()`.
> > > >> > > > > >    - Replace simple `String{Buffer,Builder}` usages with
> > > direct
> > > >> > > > `String`
> > > >> > > > > >    concatenations or `String.format()`.
> > > >> > > > > >    - Simplifying boolean expressions like `obj instanceof
> > > >> CharRange
> > > >> > > ==
> > > >> > > > > >    false` to `!(obj instanceof CharRange)`.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > >> > > > > > Jonathan
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>

--001a113c457600fd070553ec9124--