Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jerry Stuckle Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: ensuring unreachability Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 15:24:12 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 25 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:23:32 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="f0ea22b8e90f9304762d4b6484233470"; logging-data="18389"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/h9vtEd/AgMkJTx0hP3YtrNuNBy5zKQs0=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:Yh16vr2omR0Iu/K1Z8sRdrcBcJg= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:31155 On 2/19/2015 1:20 PM, Volker Borchert wrote: > Jerry Stuckle wrote: > >> You need to give the maintainer some credit, also. A maintainer has to >> be familiar enough with code that he/she can make the necessary changes. >> This means not only the syntax of the language, but the operation of >> the code he/she is changing, and what it can affect in other areas of >> the code. And if he/she does make a change like the OP is concerned >> about, then a code review and/or testing should catch it. > > Where the code review in this case can be done mechanically, e.g. > by findbugs, which would complain about the fallthru. > Mechanical code reviews are OK as a first pass, but I've seen them miss too many logic errors. I much prefer eyeballing by a different programmer. It's how I've run all the projects I've managed over the last 25 years. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================