Add new ReferenceComparison check#11
Conversation
|
Yeah I was just looking through these using IntelliJ's inspection. There are definitely a few interesting cases here. The The The ones in the type definitions like The |
|
Thanks for taking to time to look at those. Is there an IntelliJ inspection check for this? I cannot find it. But if there is, I think that would be preferred over an error-prone check. If not, what's your opinion on this new check? There aren't that many false positives, but I think it does provide some value and it's not that hard to suppress false positives. |
|
Yeah the IntelliJ inspection is I actually think the error prone check is the better approach though because we don't control what inspections people have enabled for IntelliJ and you don't always see them anyway, whereas errorprone is enforced in CI. It's not hard to add a suppression in the very limited cases we really do want to use reference equality. |
|
Oh neat. Alright, cool. I'll mark this as ready for review then. I can add more tests if you think it's necessary. |
ajsutton
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Sorry for the delay - got caught up with some other issues Friday.
|
No worries! It's all good. |
|
Pushed out a 1.1.1 release with this btw. |
Opening as a draft for initial feedback, in case this isn't something we want.
There are about two dozen false positives in Teku that are hard to ignore. Thoughts on these? There's a couple that may be actual issues (
validatorSyncCommitteeIndices&SimpleBranchNode#toString), but they don't seem that important.Findings in Teku
This work is associated with this PR: