Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.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: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 48 Message-ID: <11514068.659.1334435840909.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbtr10> References: <15429764.10.1333589060953.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbae2> <10168300.3443.1333651355770.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbcto7> <4f7e2ee4$0$288$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4f8772f3$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4f88cddf$0$284$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <2514833.715.1334433180928.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbckz3> <4f89db2b$0$291$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> 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 1334435841 25062 127.0.0.1 (14 Apr 2012 20:37:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 20:37:21 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <4f89db2b$0$291$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> 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 X-Received-Bytes: 3352 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:13550 Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: > Lew wrote: >> Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: >>> Are you claiming that it is poor software architecture/development >>> to write code that does not have a single flaw at time of being written >>> but 5 or 10 years later give warnings or errors with a new Java >>> version? >> >> I don't know if he is, but I am. > > I think you should read it once more. >=20 > I don't think you really consider programmers not able to predict the > future to be poor programmers. >=20 > > The point was made upthread that when you introduce a new Java version,= you must regression-test it like any other system component. If that regre= ssion introduces new warnings or errors, and you leave them alone, that's p= oor development. Period. >=20 > Nobody is denying that. >=20 > We are discussing whether the code comes with technical debt or not. It does, once the compiler has been changed and the concomitant warnings ig= nored. The question isn't whether it was technical debt in 1993 but whether it's t= echnical debt today. Your argument only presents a case that it wasn't tech= nical debt in 1993. > It does not. >=20 > Unless one require developers to be able to predict the future. >=20 > Which I do not. At no point do I require anyone to predict the future, only observe the pre= sent. You're the one attempting to reframe the discussion to one of prognos= tication. It is not a valid restatement of the issue to do so. At the point when the OP's project converted to Java 5 or later, and ignore= d the generics warnings, those warnings became technical debt. No crystal b= all needed; this is historic. --=20 Lew