On 18 Oct 2022, at 7:47, Remi Forax wrote:
javac -Xlint:all MyScopedLock.java
MyScopedLock.java:23: warning: [try] auto-closeable resource ignored
is never
referenced in body of corresponding try statement
try(MyScopedLock ignored = l.lock()) {
^
1 warning
So here we may have a clash of philosophies for the enhanced-for and
how people
use the `AutoCloseable`.
I think we should disallow '_' here, mostly because the variable is
used to call close() so i think it is a good idea to maintain the idea
that a try-with-resources is just a syntactic sugar on top of a
try/finally that call close().
I think the opposite on this one. It seems to me that using `_` is an
excellent way to mute that warning. I find it annoyingly opinionated:
Why shouldn’t I expect to use TWR to simulate the RAII-style
open/close events from C++, without lint bumping my elbow?
If we allow '_', it means that we are in a way able to call _.close().
The documentation for desugaring TWR can just introduce a new name if
necessary; the JLS introduces unnamed temps all the time and this is
just another place for one.
The other case is the case (2), should we allow '_' in a middle of an
init list, i think that like with 'var' we should not allow '_' in an
init list.
So reject
int x, _;
I agree.
