lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shai Erera (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2285) Code cleanup from all sorts of (trivial) warnings
Date Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:13:27 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2285?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12838456#action_12838456
] 

Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-2285:
------------------------------------

bq. some of the changes are problematic because they appear in generated classes (like QueryParser),

So? All I did was remove unnecessary semicolons and casts ... next time those files will be
generated, the warnings will return. But at least until then we can live w/ few less warnings
... which will allow my perfectionist eyes to rest a little :).

bq. replaced all LUCENE_CURRENT constants in tests

Yes, I figured I'm already touching these files, let's do it all at once. Reduced another
~300 warnings.

About the removed casts - eclipse really warns you on unnecessary casts. I have never found
a case where it was wrong. The removed cast from TestCharArraySet is justified because you
want to test the contains(Object) method, which is exactly what happens. In fact, when I look
at the code, I think there is a wrong cast:
{code}
    assertFalse(CharArraySet.EMPTY_SET.contains((Object) "foo")); // invokes the contains(Object)
method
    assertFalse(CharArraySet.EMPTY_SET.contains("foo".toCharArray())); // invokes the contains(Object)
method
    assertFalse(CharArraySet.EMPTY_SET.contains("foo".toCharArray(),0,3)); // invokes the
contains(char[], int, int) method
{code}

If the intention was to check all 3 contains methods, then the first cast should have been
to CharSequence? Anyway, the removed cast (the second, which cast to Object) is justified
as it's indeed unnecessary.

bq. Also @SuppressWarnings("unused") is not a javac annotation

Are you sure? I have another project which compiles w/ javac and it works fine. I'll check
it, but I trust you :).

About adding casts for clarity of code - I guess that's a matter of styling, but the cast
is truly unnecessary, and just produces a warning. I would like the code to be free of those,
but that's only my opinion.

> Code cleanup from all sorts of (trivial) warnings
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2285
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2285
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Shai Erera
>            Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.1
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2285.patch
>
>
> I would like to do some code cleanup and remove all sorts of trivial warnings, like unnecessary
casts, problems w/ javadocs, unused variables, redundant null checks, unnecessary semicolon
etc. These are all very trivial and should not pose any problem.
> I'll create another issue for getting rid of deprecated code usage, like LuceneTestCase
and all sorts of deprecated constructors. That's also trivial because it only affects Lucene
code, but it's a different type of change.
> Another issue I'd like to create is about introducing more generics in the code, where
it's missing today - not changing existing API. There are many places in the code like that.
> So, with you permission, I'll start with the trivial ones first, and then move on to
the others.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message