On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Simon Steiner <simonsteiner1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We have an old branch with findbugs passing I was going to port this to
> trunk.
>

I noticed you committed an update to fix many XGC warnings. Thanks for
addressing my comment.

I also notice you have introduced x.clone() in many cases. You should be
careful in doing this not to introduce a performance hit in hot code paths.
I expect you did this to fix various *_EXPOSE_REP* warnings. I often
exclude those warnings rather than introduce clone() usage due to potential
performance problems. It requires some amount of subjective judgment to
decide whether to exclude or use clone. In the present case, it may have
been better to simply exclude these warnings, e.g., by using the following
in the exclude file:

<Match>
  <Or>
    <Bug pattern="EI_EXPOSE_REP"/>
    <Bug pattern="EI_EXPOSE_REP2"/>
  </Or>
</Match>

Make sure that all unit and integration tests are still running after these
changes, which one hopes does not introduce any regressions.


>
> Thanks
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Delmelle [mailto:andreas.delme...@telenet.be]
> Sent: 21 May 2015 19:48
> To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release XML Graphics FOP 2.0
>
> Hi guys
>
> > On 21 May 2015, at 20:00, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:
> >
> > I would prefer no findbugs warnings going into the release. I'm
> > finding more and more commercial uses of code have policies that
> > require no findbugs warnings. You can simply add entries to the
> > findbugs-exclude.xml file to disable the warnings for the release.
>
> I agree with this preference. Adding entries to the exclusion file is OK,
> but at least, the assessment should be made whether they can/should be
> fixed
> right away.
>
> BTW - Not sure why some people are still reluctant to use it... It is
> really
> only a tiny effort to install that plugin in your IDE of choice. Granted,
> you will likely get a newer version than 2.0.3, which produces even more
> warnings --3.0.1 produces 167 on unmodified FOP trunk.
>
> If everyone had committed to using it in the past, there would not be 143
> warnings to address right before the release...
>
>
> @Simon -
> To relieve you of some of the burden, I am definitely willing to assist
> with
> combing through those. How do I proceed? Do I commit related changes
> directly to trunk, so that you can merge them into the branch later?
>
>
> KR
>
> Andreas
>
>

Reply via email to