Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Lew Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: How to turn off those warning messages during ant build? Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:42:35 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 48 Message-ID: <10168300.3443.1333651355770.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbcto7> References: <32649009.2052.1333546152596.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbsf4> <15429764.10.1333589060953.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbae2> NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.28.149.29 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1333652935 1519 127.0.0.1 (5 Apr 2012 19:08:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 19:08:55 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.28.149.29; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T User-Agent: G2/1.0 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:13421 Daniel Pitts wrote: > Lew wrote: >> In the OP's case we're talking about a system that, by his statement, >> "hundreds" of these warning messages. He didn't say what the state of >> testing was for that system, nor much about the code that has the >> problem other than it was "written by different people", but with that >> degree of warning blast there is a high probability of real trouble. >> >> I do not perceive that the OP's understanding is nuanced enough to >> reliably triage warnings that can be suppressed from real trouble. In >> general, warnings represent trouble, and your suggestion to suppress >> them carries risk. In the OP's case, I assess the biggest risk is that >> the technical debt is far deeper than just some raw types. The degree of >> careless that leads "different people" to ignore warnings until there >> are hundreds of them bodes ill indeed for the OP's project. > Well, it could also be that the program was originally written for Java= =20 > 1.4. These types of warnings didn't happen in 1.4 because there was no=20 > such thing as raw vs generic types. It *could* be, but then Java 5 has been out for seven and a half years now.= That's a very long type to carry that technical debt. Generics were introd= uced for a reason, so my comments stand. The OP has a real problem, and hid= ing it is not the right approach. "They developed it for Java 1.4 eight yea= rs ago" is not even a pitiful excuse. Java 5 is already obsolete, and Java = 6 is not far behind. Move forward or die. >> It's one thing to ignore warnings you inherit from earlier programmers, >> but that doesn't excuse the earlier programmers or solve the problem. > True. Often if I'm working in a source file that has a yellow rash=20 > (warnings show up yellow in my IDE editor), I will spend some time=20 > creating or verifying the Unit tests, and then clean up the warnings.=20 > Even if that source file is "owned" by some other group. >=20 > This approach of course depends on the culture in your shop, and should= =20 > be taken with care and tact. But leaving them alone in the name of "care and tact" is like lending a her= oin addict money because you don't want to offend them. Sure, sometimes you= will choose to do that, but don't pretend it solves anything. --=20 Lew