@SuppressWarnings() names

I really think the names used as arguments in the annotation should be more carefully choosen to apply to Idea inspections only.
Most importantly @SuppressWarnings("ALL") might be dangerous as there is a chance that it completely disables warnings from other tools like javac or any bytecode postprocessing tools.

5 comments
Comment actions Permalink

But in those cases where an inspection corresponds exactly to a javac warning, the names already defined by javac should be reused:
http://www.jetbrains.net/jira/browse/IDEA-2478

0
Comment actions Permalink

Good one. I'll update my inspections to use the javac standard suppression strings, where applicable. This will break any existing suppressions of those inspections, but all such suppressions were created in the EAP, so no gaurantees were broken. JetBrains also has a bit of work to do for some built-in inspections.

--Dave Griffith

0
Comment actions Permalink

That would not only break suppressions but inspection profiles as well.
Let's introduce special method in LocalInspectionTool for suppression id
which would delegate to getShortName() by default.

-


Maxim Shafirov
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

Can you translate that for a mere mortal?

Anyway I don't mind if my profiles get broken, that why it's EAP.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Skip, that's my bad :) There's already one called getID().

-


Maxim Shafirov
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0

Please sign in to leave a comment.