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

Florian Brunner fbrunnerlist at gmx.ch
Thu Oct 25 23:12:44 UTC 2007 

Hi Pavel!

Thanks for your answer! I can't check the comments about the diffs right 
now, but let's wait for the mercurial transition, then.

-Florian

Pavel Porvatov schrieb:
> Hi Florian,
>
> I like Your idea to clean code and I hope we will make it ASAP. I will 
> be a reviewer of Your changes and at the end I will put Your changes 
> into JDK. At the first I want to notify about couple things:
> 1. We are moving on mercurial (http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/) 
> now and it will take up to month
> 2. We are going to do some refactoring at the transition moment, so I 
> don't see any reason to do big diffs now, because we will catch many 
> conflicts! (now I cannot do commit).
>
> I thought about our situation and I think the best way is:
>
> 1. We are waiting the end of mercurial transition (You will see it, 
> because openJDK will be moved on mercurial too)
> 2. You prepare diffs on NEW SOURCES. Note, that I cannot review diffs 
> with size 300kb, I'm sorry :(. I reviewed 20 kb and it took some time. 
> And it will be difficult to review new changes in Your diffs, so try 
> to separate Your changes into files not more than 5-10 kb. Let's start 
> with the first change with size about 50 kb (select separation as you 
> want)
> 3. You send me Your changes, I review it and return feedback
> 4. If Your change is excellent, I will commit these changes via our 
> internal procedure (don't worry about this step :))
> 5. We repeat the steps 3-4 and so on... (We can increase a next diffs)
>
> Ok, let's discuss about current diffs (I didn't see whole Your fix and 
> I stop it now, let's wait mercurial transition and code refactoring):
>
> 1. DesktopProperty:
> Can You change declaration into
> private final static ReferenceQueue<Object> queue = new 
> ReferenceQueue<Object>();
> (note that I added final and replaced HashMap by Map) and remove a 
> static section?
>
> 2. WindowsScrollBarUI:
> Can You change declaration into
>         private final static Map<String, WeakReference<Grid>> map = 
> new HashMap<String, WeakReference<Grid>>();
> and remove a static section?
>
> 3. AbstractButton:
> What about
> (JComponent)AbstractButton.this
>
> 4. ArrayTable:
> (Hashtable<Object, Object>)table
> has unchecked cast
>
> Don't shy to ask me if You have questions...
>
> Thanks, Pavel.
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> back from my holidays I finally found time to work the patch over. :-)
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> -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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>

More information about the swing-dev mailing list