[External] : Re: eclipse warnings

[Andy Goryachev]

Yeah, that one.  Probably for the better - very little probability of uncovering any bugs, and too high of a probability of introducing a regression.

Same with "unnecessary cast or instanceof" and "redundant null check".  "potential null pointer access" - there is probably some non-zero value in having the warning, but very few people would welcom @SuppressWarning where it isn't an issue.

You are right though - there are more important issues to be resolved - 3,876 to be exact, see

https://bugs.openjdk.org/issues/?jql=component%20in%20(javafx)%20and%20status%20in%20(open%2C%20new%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22)%20and%20labels%20not%20in%20(okToLeaveInJI)

-andy


From: John Hendrikx <john.hendrikx at gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 at 14:17
To: Andy Goryachev <andy.goryachev at oracle.com>, openjfx-dev at openjdk.org <openjfx-dev at openjdk.org>
Subject: [External] : Re: eclipse warnings

This one for example: https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1095<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1095__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NRHVOIJ65hopuPgetAT7stNzW3jh1BY4ZqHVTLuY3XHIQ72la7gG7TGgT_j0R9q_Gf3_l8RDUswG6IZijoq5ZLvZ3DXl$>

It was auto closed, and at this point probably has many merge conflicts, which is why I let it go closed.

--John
On 05/12/2023 20:27, Andy Goryachev wrote:

> I did many warning fixes, and there are PR's outstanding with warning fixes, but they're not getting reviewed.
Are they still in Draft?

https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3Arfr<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/openjdk/jfx/pulls?q=is*3Aopen*is*3Apr*label*3Arfr__;JSslKyU!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NRHVOIJ65hopuPgetAT7stNzW3jh1BY4ZqHVTLuY3XHIQ72la7gG7TGgT_j0R9q_Gf3_l8RDUswG6IZijoq5ZP_iqZdL$>

-andy


From: openjfx-dev <openjfx-dev-retn at openjdk.org><mailto:openjfx-dev-retn at openjdk.org> on behalf of John Hendrikx <john.hendrikx at gmail.com><mailto:john.hendrikx at gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 at 03:16
To: openjfx-dev at openjdk.org<mailto:openjfx-dev at openjdk.org> <openjfx-dev at openjdk.org><mailto:openjfx-dev at openjdk.org>
Subject: Re: eclipse warnings

IMHO, there is no capacity for this.

I did many warning fixes, and there are PR's outstanding with warning fixes, but they're not getting reviewed.

There are other PR's outstanding that are more valuable, but are not getting reviewed.

I feel we need to fix that first before we can endulge in warning fixes.

As for the potential null pointer access, it's often a false positive; static analyzers have a hard time determining if a loop is entered at least once (or an if in that loop) and so will warn that a local can maybe be null if it was initalized inside a loop.

--John
On 04/12/2023 17:34, Andy Goryachev wrote:


Dear colleagues:

Imported the openjfx project into another workspace with a more stringent error checking and discovered a few issues:


  1.  potential null pointer access: 295
  2.  unnecessary cast or instanceof: 190
  3.  redundant null check: 61

Do we want to clean these up?

-andy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/openjfx-dev/attachments/20231205/1f6ffea5/attachment.htm>