Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Close IO streams after the plugin has finished reading and writing #126

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 4, 2018

Conversation

fractalwrench
Copy link
Contributor

@fractalwrench fractalwrench commented Aug 22, 2018

Goal

Closes IO streams after the plugin has finished reading and writing, in a finally block, which is guaranteed to be executed last.

Changeset

  • Altered existing use of Closeable values so that close is called in a try-finally block.
  • Added catch block where this was previously missing, that logs a warning

Tests

Ran mazerunner scenarios.

Review

For the submitter, initial self-review:

  • Commented on code changes inline explain the reasoning behind the approach
  • Reviewed the test cases added for completeness and possible points for discussion
  • A changelog entry was added for the goal of this pull request
  • Check the scope of the changeset - is everything in the diff required for the pull request?
  • This pull request is ready for:
    • Initial review of the intended approach, not yet feature complete
    • Structural review of the classes, functions, and properties modified
    • Final review

For the pull request reviewer(s), this changeset has been reviewed for:

  • Consistency across platforms for structures or concepts added or modified
  • Consistency between the changeset and the goal stated above
  • Internal consistency with the rest of the library - is there any overlap between existing interfaces and any which have been added?
  • Usage friction - is the proposed change in usage cumbersome or complicated?
  • Performance and complexity - are there any cases of unexpected O(n^3) when iterating, recursing, flat mapping, etc?
  • Concurrency concerns - if components are accessed asynchronously, what issues will arise
  • Thoroughness of added tests and any missing edge cases
  • Idiomatic use of the language

FileWriter writer = null

try {
writer = new FileWriter(manifestPath)

This comment was marked as resolved.

This comment was marked as resolved.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ah I see 👍

} catch (Exception e) {
project.logger.warn("Failed to write Bugsnag ProGuard settings", e)
} finally {
fr.close()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't there be a null check here, in case the writer was not initialized?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch, I've updated this to include a null check.

@Pezzah
Copy link
Contributor

Pezzah commented Sep 3, 2018

@fractalwrench
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, good catch! I've updated the PR to close the additional reader.

@fractalwrench fractalwrench dismissed kattrali’s stale review September 4, 2018 07:54

addressed review comments

@fractalwrench fractalwrench merged commit 6c43053 into master Sep 4, 2018
@fractalwrench fractalwrench deleted the io-cleanup branch September 4, 2018 07:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants