Use @SafeVarargs annotation instad of multiple fixed-arity factory methods that overload varargs method

[npryce]

The overloaded methods were written to reduce compile warnings in client code. The @SafeVarargs annotation that was introduced in Java 7 suppresses them altogether.

This will change the ABI, but code will still be source compatible.

[lukeu]

I'm currently hitting warnings with IsIterableContainingInOrder.contains

Should @SafeVarArgs be added to this and other methods also? I.e. should this fix be extended to annotate methods which might not have had overloads to begin with?

(Or might it be that these methods are not actually safe to annotate this way...?)

[kwin]

Even with 2.0.0.0 I still do not see the annotation on org.hamcrest.Matchers.contains(...) therefore I still get the following warning
Type safety: A generic array of Matcher<? super something> is created for a varargs parameter

[ePaul]

I think this was closed preliminarily (unless it was meant as a "won't fix", but then a comment would be nice).

I propose all of the varargs methods in Matchers should get this annotation, as well as the static methods they are delegating to. (Unless there are some which actually write into the array, but I don't think that is happening here.)

(I don't understand how this changes the ABI ... the method still accepts an array of the upper bound type, right?)

[kwin]

@sf105 Would you consider reopening this?

[sf105]

Agreed. This have got too confused.

[arifogel]

What exactly will be done with this issue? It looks like the current source has the @SafeVarargs annotation:
https://github.com/hamcrest/JavaHamcrest/blob/master/hamcrest/src/main/java/org/hamcrest/Matchers.java#L886
Will there ever be another release with this change? (Release is out, but under different artifactId)
Isn't this issue technically resolved (but not by the original milestone)?

[tumbarumba]

Agree, closing this.