One major, humongous, huge, enormous, incredible STUPID aspect of FindBugs is that it works on class files.
D'oh. Source-level static analysis means your error/warning is better focused on the problematic AST Node, and its much easier to program 'quick fixes' right in there. I'm still waiting for a rewrite of findbugs that works on source and not class files. Until then, I understand looking at findbugs, going: Neat, we should have something like that! - and then not using it all and rewriting its features instead. It's unfortunate that the various efforts happening to get there aren't communicating. On Sep 5, 12:15 am, Casper Bang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We used to say "If it compiles, the crap works". Now a day, with all > the annotation cr... stuff, this doesn't seem to hold true any longer. > > /Casper > > On Sep 4, 10:38 pm, Christian Catchpole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I'm thinking of writing something called HideBugs, which rather than > > pointing them out, simply obfuscates them.. What you don't know won't > > hurt you I reckon. Michael, you use something similar don't you? :) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
