Github user zentol commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4343
merging.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the fea
Github user zentol commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4343
The switch statements can be modified to be checkstyle compliant with few
changes.
`NestedMethodAnalyzer#naryOperation`:
```
...
case INVOKESTATIC:
case INVOKESPECIAL:
case INVO
Github user zentol commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4343
@greghogan I agree, expanding the suppression files would be nice.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does
Github user greghogan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4343
What if we first split the suppressions files as with
`suppressions-runtime.xml`? I think we could do this in one ticket for all of
`core`, `java`, and `optimizer`.
---
If your project is set up
Github user dawidwys commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4343
This is the last commit of series. It enables the stricter checkstyle. So
should be merged last.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitH
