On Oct 5, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Oct 5, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> On Oct 3, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Oct 3, 2013, at 9:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> marcus for the critics next time please keep them else we will not be able >>>> to decide if we used them or not. >>>> This is not three little classes that will change something. Especially >>>> when they are part of a large library. >>>> >>> >>> But we don't use them. >> >> Yes but let us the time to think. >> First we should run the critics on everything then fix the problem. > > -> the critic explicitly did not run them (there are more of that kind that i > did not remove) > -> I checked them and they where checking for special pragma tagged methods. > Some pragmas > that where used in some project but I have never seen them used *ever*. > >> We should reorganize many things. Removing three classes that are well >> identified is not >> nice because now if I want to know which rules were not good I will have to >> load I do not know which >> version. >> > > The rules where really useless, they where testing a convention we don't use > *and* they where already > omitted by the critic browser. Here are the rationals of the three: > > rationale > ^ 'Checks that methods marked with <modifier: #final> is never > overridden.' > rationale > ^ 'Checks that a method marked with <modifier: #override> overrides an > actual superclass method.' > rationale > ^ 'Checks that methods marked with <modifier: #super> are always called > when overridden.' > yes that ones :) > Marcus > > > > >
