<Swing Dev> [PATCH] 6179357-related: Working on warnings removal

[Alexander Potochkin]

Hello Florian

Sorry for delay

> Hi,
> 
> back from my holidays I finally found time to work the patch over. :-)

Great !

> There is now one patch per package.
> 
> When compiling with
> -Xlint -J-Xms80m -J-Xmx256m -Xlint:-serial -Xlint:-deprecation 
> -Xlint:-fallthrough -Xmaxwarns 1200
> all patches together reduce the number of reported warnings from 1181 to 
> 88.
> 
> I tried only to change things related to the warnings and not to change 
> any public or protected APIs in public or protected classes in this patch.
> 
> No new @author tags are added.
> 
> At many places I tried to add type parameters as meaningful as possible, 
> but with some cases I just used Object, if a more meaningful type 
> parameter was not so trivial. You might want to refactor this if needed. 
> (Though everything should work as it is.)
> 
> The basis of this patch is revision 254. Apply it at 
> openjdk/jdk/trunk/j2se/src.
> 
> This will be the basis to add generics support to the Swing framework 
> and I will try to further reduce the number of warnings once I started 
> with this task.

I'll look into it next week

Thanks for you work !

alexp

> 
> -Florian
> 
> 
> Alexander Potochkin schrieb:
>> Hello Florian
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> here's my first patch. When compiling with
>>> -Xlint -J-Xms80m -J-Xmx256m -Xlint:-serial -Xlint:-deprecation 
>>> -Xlint:-fallthrough -Xmaxwarns 1200
>>> this patch reduces the number of reported warnings from 1185 to 91.
>>>
>>> This will be the basis to add generics support to the Swing framework 
>>> and I will try to further reduce the number of warnings once I 
>>> started with this task.
>>>
>>> The basis of this patch is revision 250. Apply it at 
>>> openjdk/jdk/trunk/j2se/src.
>>>
>>> I tried not to change any public or protected APIs in public or 
>>> protected classes in this patch.
>>>
>>> At many places I tried to add type parameters as meaningful as 
>>> possible, but with some cases I just used Object, if a more 
>>> meaningful type parameter was not so trivial. You might want to 
>>> refactor this if needed. (Though everything should work as it is.)
>>
>> Could you please to split your fix to several ones ?
>> It is difficult to review so big fixes
>>
>> I'd suggest to make a fix for a package
>>
>> We also usually don't mix two problems in one fix
>> so it is better to factor out removing warnings from existent code
>> to another fix
>>
>> We also update the @author tag in a very rare occasion
>> when someone added a significant amount of code to a class
>>
>>>
>>> I also started a new project at java.net: 
>>> https://swing-generics.dev.java.net/ (pending approval)
>>> Am I correct that with the licences of openjdk I am allowed to 
>>> publish the modified swing project in source, binary and javadoc form?
>>
>> I hope you can do it, because I can't imagine it was not allowed by 
>> the lisence
>>
>> But since I am not a lawyer, probably someone else can confirm that ?
>>
>> Thanks
>> alexp
>>
>>
>>> **
>>> -Florian
>>>
>>> Alexander Potochkin schrieb:
>>>> Hello Florian
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I decided first to remove some warning for trivial cases, since 
>>>>> even if I compile with
>>>>> -Xlint:-serial -Xlint:-deprecation -Xlint:-cast -Xlint:-fallthrough 
>>>>> -Xmaxwarns 1200
>>>>> I get 977 warnings! And since most of them are [unckecked] 
>>>>> warnings, it's hard to see, if and where I introduce new 
>>>>> [unckecked] warnings, when adding generics.
>>>>
>>>> You are right, unfortunately we have a lot of warnings in compile time
>>>>
>>>> We should have paid more attention to this problem
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> alexp
>>>>
>>>>> Please tell me if somebody else is working on the warnings removal, 
>>>>> too.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Florian
>>>>>
>>>>> Florian Brunner schrieb:
>>>>>> Hi Alecander!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your help. I installed the basic environment and 
>>>>>> started to work on this issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note that the path at
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/source/browse/openjdk/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> as well as at
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/servlets/ProjectSource
>>>>>>
>>>>>> don't seem to be correct!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At
>>>>>> |https://openjdk.dev.java.net/svn/openjdk/trunk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> there's only a www directory!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Instead I checked out
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/svn/openjdk/jdk/trunk/j2se/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this the correct path to work on the Swing project?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'will post to this list again when there are more news or 
>>>>>> questions arise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Florian
>>>>>>
>>>>>> |Alexander Potochkin schrieb:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Florian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Welcome to the swing-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The RFE #6179357 is definitely worth investigating
>>>>>>> we was going to generify Swing for 1.6
>>>>>>> but unfortunately didn't have enough time
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your fixes are welcome
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is the information how to contribute:
>>>>>>> http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For now the process is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Become a contributor
>>>>>>> download openJDK
>>>>>>> make the fix
>>>>>>> ask any related questions on this list
>>>>>>> submit a patch
>>>>>>> we'll assign a sponsor who we'll review your fix
>>>>>>> and put it back when it is done
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The whole process will be simplified when we complete moving to 
>>>>>>> Mercurial repository
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For this RFE you don't need to file JSR
>>>>>>> as you mentioned changes should as backward compatible as possible
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but we'll need the request to the special committee which keeps 
>>>>>>> track of the Java public API, the sponsor will do it for you
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please note that we prefer to make the incremental fixes which 
>>>>>>> fix the particular problem, I mean, not to mix e.g. generifying 
>>>>>>> and optimization
>>>>>>> in one fix but split it to two ones.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >I want my
>>>>>>> > progress to be visible by the public. So what is the best 
>>>>>>> strategy? Work at
>>>>>>> > openjdk.org? Work at SwingLabs? Start a new project at java.net?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The current process doesn't seem to provide much visibility for 
>>>>>>> the public. To make it visible I personally would do the 
>>>>>>> following things:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - start a project on java.net
>>>>>>> (not sure it helps for this particular case)
>>>>>>> - blog about your progress and discuss it with the community
>>>>>>> (this is the best way to make your work visible)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> alexp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm interessted in the RFE "6179357: Request interface 
>>>>>>>> javax.swing.tree.TreeModel to have a generic type for nodes". Is 
>>>>>>>> there already someone working on this issue? If not I would like 
>>>>>>>> to help there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I want to address following issues:
>>>>>>>> - add generics support to the Swing framework
>>>>>>>> - provide support for new language features like varargs
>>>>>>>> - provide better support for the collection framework
>>>>>>>> - optimize code where reasonable
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you think this is a good idea? How probable will such a 
>>>>>>>> change make its way to the "official" jdk?
>>>>>>>> I sent the signed SCA to Sun. So what would be the next steps? I 
>>>>>>>> want my progress to be visible by the public. So what is the 
>>>>>>>> best strategy? Work at openjdk.org? Work at SwingLabs? Start a 
>>>>>>>> new project at java.net?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Should I work on a branch of openjdk? Or should I copy the 
>>>>>>>> current revision to a new repository? What is the easiest/ best 
>>>>>>>> way to get the source back to openjdk?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is a JSR needed for such a change? Note: the suggested changes 
>>>>>>>> should be backwards compatible (eg. thanks to the "raw type 
>>>>>>>> feature" of generics), as far as I can see up to now. (The only 
>>>>>>>> exception is of course reflection, which can always break if you 
>>>>>>>> change an API).
>>>>>>>> Thanks for your help.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Florian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>