Skip to content

Conversation

@Pankraz76
Copy link
Contributor

related to:

again this some change to be picked by maintainer if got some spare time to recreate:

image

I hereby agree to the terms of the JUnit Contributor License Agreement.


Definition of Done

"ImmutableEnumChecker", // We don`t want to use ErrorProne's annotations.
"InlineMeSuggester", // We don`t want to use ErrorProne's annotations.
"MissingSummary", // Produces a lot of findings that we consider to be false positives, for example for package-private classes and methods.
"StringSplitter", // We don`t want to use Guava.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

dont need to disable warnings they are already treaded like this for a reason by convention.

disableAllWarnings = true // considering this immense spam burden, remove this once to fix dedicated flaw. https://github.com/diffplug/spotless/pull/2766
disable( // We don`t want to use ErrorProne's annotations.
// picnic (https://error-prone.picnic.tech)
"ConstantNaming",
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

therefore this still seems an bug, as need to disable picnic warnings, as they fail the build if not treated the extra way?

isn´t it? @rickie

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @Pankraz76,

Thanks for flagging the issues with the Picnic warnings in these various tickets, such as google/error-prone#5365.

I want to emphasize that I appreciate you taking the time to apply our checks. It is great to see them being applied in the wild.

That said, to make these reports actionable, we really need a minimal reproduction case when things break. As noted by @cushon here google/error-prone#5365 (comment) and here google/error-prone#5277 (comment), simply knowing that it fails in a repository makes it very hard for us to debug.

If we can isolate the specific code causing the crash, we can fix the root cause instead of just disabling the check. To be clear, I do believe you could be right and that there is a bug in our code or in Error Prone itself. If so, we definitely want to fix it, but we need those isolated examples to make that happen.

@Pankraz76
Copy link
Contributor Author

bare prone errors seem not patchable somehow, only dedicated picnic stuff is like:

considering reopening after enabler and local check.

thanks for the effort invested and revealed tweak.

@Pankraz76 Pankraz76 closed this Dec 1, 2025
@Pankraz76 Pankraz76 mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2025
6 tasks
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.

2 participants