experience tonight. If anyone has any experience
or tips that would be great. It may be that when we migrated we lost this
coverage.
And BTW I looked into Nullaway again and it does not understand generics so
it will have many of the same headaches as findbugs/spotbugs. But it may
actually work
uch of the benefit of FindBugs/SpotBugs over Errorprone is simply
> because we tell FindBugs to assume a default annotation of NonNull (we set
> this in the package-info files). If so, is there no way to tell Errorprone
> to do the same thing?
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:18 AM Scott Wegn
How much of the benefit of FindBugs/SpotBugs over Errorprone is simply
because we tell FindBugs to assume a default annotation of NonNull (we set
this in the package-info files). If so, is there no way to tell Errorprone
to do the same thing?
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:18 AM Scott Wegner wrote
+1 And it seems there is a straightforward migration guide:
https://spotbugs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/migration.html
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 8:27 AM Maximilian Michels wrote:
> +1
>
> Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
>
>
+1
Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-November/004321.html
On 31.01.19 20:17, Anton Kedin wrote:
It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
Regards,
Anton
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi
+1 for spotbugs
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 10:38 Udi Meiri wrote:
> +1 for spotbugs
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov wrote:
>
>> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
>> it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
>>
It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
Regards,
Anton
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri wrote:
> +1 for spotbugs
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov wrote:
>
>> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
>> it's a good addition.
+1 for spotbugs
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov wrote:
> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
> it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
> spotbugs, for instance, the approach to enum switch exhaustiveness, but it
>
Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
spotbugs, for instance, the approach to enum switch exhaustiveness, but it
can be configured.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote:
> Not
YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>
> Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java worker
Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote:
>
> YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
> Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
> 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>
> On
Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java worker
and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but fixing some
uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at
https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond
12 matches
Mail list logo
