[jboss-dev] Crazy People: Re: FindBugs Reports

That's OK. Compile-time deps are not a huge deal for anyone but developers. And crazy people. As long as the run-time deps are minimal, it should be OK. - DML On 10/01/2009 12:30 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote: > I was asking because now the source will have a dependence on FindBugs > at compile time? I understand the "suppresswarning" intent. > > David M. Lloyd wrote: >> So that you can have findbugs configured to be quite sensitive, but also be >> able to silence false alarms (with an explanation). >> >> - DML >> >> On 10/01/2009 11:34 AM, Anil Saldhana wrote: >> >>> And why would you decorate your source code with FindBugs specific >>> annotations? >>> >>> Kabir Khan wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, yes I meant maven >>>> On 1 Oct 2009, at 17:19, Paul Gier wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> You mean in our Maven repo? Sure, I can add it today. >>>>> >>>>> Kabir Khan wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Paul, >>>>>> Can we get the latest findbugs plugin in our svn please? >>>>>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 14:50, Anil Saldhana wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> AndyM was saying that before log trace call is finally written to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> sink, there is some overhead in creating objects etc which are just >>>>>>> thrown away if trace is not enabled. So rather than figure out >>>>>>> whether >>>>>>> trace is enabled upfront, log4j does this check at the time of >>>>>>> writing >>>>>>> after having done some processing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David M. Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sometimes. But doing: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> log.trace("foo"); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> is faster than: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> if (log.isTraceEnabled()) log.trace("foo"); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> because there's no computation involved in the log parameter, so >>>>>>>> it's just >>>>>>>> a plain method call, and the internal impl will do the same check >>>>>>>> anyway. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - DML >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 09/29/2009 10:53 AM, Anil Saldhana wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Additionally, as we discussed, flagging log.trace/debug without >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> log.isTraceEnabled/debugEnabled wrappers. That may be a feature. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jesper Pedersen wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://findbugs.sourceforge.net/bugDescriptions.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> looks for doPrivileged in the descriptions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:46:36 Anil Saldhana wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am wondering if FindBugs does flag the lack of privileged >>>>>>>>>>> blocks >>>>>>>>>>> around sensitive ops such as loadClass, setTCCL etc? I cannot >>>>>>>>>>> find any >>>>>>>>>>> reference online. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> David M. Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Does FindBugs support using @SuppressWarnings() or similar? >>>>>>>>>>>> This is what >>>>>>>>>>>> I do with IDEA and it works well. I use @SuppressWarnings >>>>>>>>>>>> (on classes, >>>>>>>>>>>> members, or local var declarations) or "//noinspection" for >>>>>>>>>>>> other cases, >>>>>>>>>>>> and then add a comment beforehand explaining why the problem >>>>>>>>>>>> isn't really >>>>>>>>>>>> a problem. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - DML >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 09/29/2009 08:38 AM, Jesper Pedersen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please, add a FindBugs filter file to the configuration >>>>>>>>>>>>> where we can add >>>>>>>>>>>>> exclusions - f.ex. org.jfree (unless someone wants to submit >>>>>>>>>>>>> patches >>>>>>>>>>>>> upstream). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Feel free to rip the JBJCA setup :) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jesper >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday 28 September 2009 22:33:22 Shelly McGowan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've published the FindBugs report set up by the JBoss QA >>>>>>>>>>>>>> team run >>>>>>>>>>>>>> against JBoss AS. The reports can be viewed here: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hudson.jboss.org/hudson/view/JBoss%20AS/job/JBoss-AS-6.0.x-findb >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ugs/ 8/findbugsResult >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This report shows a total of 5675 warnings, 877 of which are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> categorized as High Priority. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The report for Branch_5_x can be viewed here: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hudson.jboss.org/hudson/view/JBoss%20AS/job/JBoss-AS-5.x-findbug >>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/2/ findbugsResult/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Branch_5_x report has 6089 warnings, 977 High Priority. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> These issues should be addressed when committing to trunk or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Branch_5_x. Take time out to look at the report data. Most >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> warnings can be easily addressed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've started a parent JIRA task for tracking: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBAS-7295 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and will create subtasks as needed after additional review >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> report data. > _______________________________________________ > jboss-development mailing list > jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ jboss-development mailing list jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development