search

eclipse-equinox / equinox

equinox
Eclipse Public License 2.0
28 stars 60 forks source link

Remove unnecessary casts #647

Closed stephan-herrmann closed 2 weeks ago

stephan-herrmann commented 2 weeks ago

When https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/pull/2471 is merged, ecj will signal more casts as unnecessary.

With this PR I suggest to remove affected casts before new warnings will show up in the build.

akurtakov commented 2 weeks ago

Version bump needed: Failed to execute goal org.eclipse.tycho.extras:tycho-p2-extras-plugin:4.0.8:compare-version-with-baselines (compare-attached-artifacts-with-release) on project org.eclipse.equinox.app: Only qualifier changed for (org.eclipse.equinox.app/1.7.100.v20240620-1529). Expected to have bigger x.y.z than what is available in baseline (1.7.100.v20240321-1445) -> [Help 1]

github-actions[bot] commented 2 weeks ago

Test Results

  660 files  ±0    660 suites  ±0   1h 11m 32s :stopwatch: +34s 2 195 tests ±0  2 148 :white_check_mark: ±0   47 :zzz: ±0  0 :x: ±0  6 729 runs  ±0  6 586 :white_check_mark: ±0  143 :zzz: ±0  0 :x: ±0 

Results for commit 375d2181. ± Comparison against base commit 029433de.

:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.

stephan-herrmann commented 2 weeks ago

testCoordinatedConfigurationOnBeforeRegisteredManagedService (org.osgi.test.cases.cm.junit.CMCoordinationTestCase) failed

Sorry, I can't find that test so I cannot test if this failure could possibly be related.

tjwatson commented 2 weeks ago

Sorry, I can't find that test so I cannot test if this failure could possibly be related.

It is not related.

stephan-herrmann commented 2 weeks ago

Sorry, I can't find that test so I cannot test if this failure could possibly be related.

It is not related.

thanks.

merks commented 2 weeks ago

I think it’s best for there to be one commit not 3.

I think I can do that with squash and merge button, but I’ve not tried that before.

merks commented 2 weeks ago

That worked okay.

stephan-herrmann commented 2 weeks ago

I think I can do that with squash and merge button, but I’ve not tried that before.

There's a first time for everything :)

(On other occasions people wanted to have version bumps separate from code changes, but perhaps that's only relevant in projects with BETA_JAVAXY branches).

merks commented 2 weeks ago

Yes sometimes people want that. I think to make revert easier. But we don’t expect to revert this and the preceding state would never build successfully. 😬

merks commented 2 weeks ago

And probably two separate version bump commits never make sense. 😱

Personally I generally amend and force push until I’m done. No one has complained so far. 😜

tjwatson commented 2 weeks ago

Yes sometimes people want that. I think to make revert easier. But we don’t expect to revert this and the preceding state would never build successfully.

Yes, that was the reason for the policy. Generally, it caused problems if we reverted and one I-Build to the next we had a version decrease. The other issue was if other changes happened after then the version decrease would become an issue also. But a straight revert in this project seems pretty rare vs. a new PR that fixes the issue on top of the existing changes.

merks commented 2 weeks ago

Nothing I commit ever needs to be reverted. 👼 😜