You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@beam.apache.org by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> on 2019/01/31 07:28:26 UTC
Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java worker
and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but fixing some
uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at
https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond errorprone and
nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not nullability
related, though nullability remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit
where a different tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in the worker, at
minimum.
Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are depending on
an active project?
Kenn
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
FYI I'm debugging a NPE deep in some code that was not annotated
with @DefaultAnnotation(Nonnull.class). Curiously, adding the annotation to
the package did not cause any failures. That never happens. Every package
takes a lot of work to get to pass findbugs nullability.
Then I went into sdks/java/core and tried to inject a bunch of nullability
errors. I could not cause any errors to be caught. But removing exclusions
from our spotbugs-filters.xml does cause errors. So it is not a noop. But
it is missing extremely obvious nullability errors. I would consider it
nonfunctional based on my experience tonight. If anyone has any experience
or tips that would be great. It may be that when we migrated we lost this
coverage.
And BTW I looked into Nullaway again and it does not understand generics so
it will have many of the same headaches as findbugs/spotbugs. But it may
actually work in this basic sense.
Kenn
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:44 AM Kenneth Knowles <kl...@google.com> wrote:
> When I turned findbugs on for the Dataflow worker, it found a number of
> synchronization issues and some other issues around possibly-bad practices
> that weren't about nullability. That's the origin of this thread - it
> really seemed that there's value added even on top of nullability where the
> bytecode analysis approach is actually inferior to source analysis since it
> relies crucially on generic support for full expressivity.
>
> As far as nullability + errorprone, my impression is that the best thing
> to do is https://github.com/uber/NullAway, and I filed
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6555 for that (and
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6556 for another, more
> rigorous one - I didn't file one for Checker framework which does it in the
> type system because it appeared to hang when I tried it)
>
> Kenn
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:20 AM Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> wrote:
>
>> How much of the benefit of FindBugs/SpotBugs over Errorprone is simply
>> because we tell FindBugs to assume a default annotation of NonNull (we set
>> this in the package-info files). If so, is there no way to tell Errorprone
>> to do the same thing?
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:18 AM Scott Wegner <sc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 And it seems there is a straightforward migration guide:
>>> https://spotbugs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/migration.html
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 8:27 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
>>>>
>>>> https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-November/004321.html
>>>>
>>>> On 31.01.19 20:17, Anton Kedin wrote:
>>>> > It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
>>>> >
>>>> > Regards,
>>>> > Anton
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri <ehudm@google.com
>>>> > <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > +1 for spotbugs
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gleb@spotify.com
>>>> > <ma...@spotify.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in
>>>> > error-prone, it's a good addition. There are few conflicts
>>>> > between error-prone and spotbugs, for instance, the approach
>>>> to
>>>> > enum switch exhaustiveness, but it can be configured.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <
>>>> iemejia@gmail.com
>>>> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for
>>>> IntelliJ.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía
>>>> > <iemejia@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
>>>> > > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does
>>>> not
>>>> > support Java
>>>> > > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles
>>>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the
>>>> > Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors.
>>>> > They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others,
>>>> > etc. You can see the result at
>>>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value,
>>>> > beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few
>>>> of
>>>> > the issues were not nullability related, though
>>>> nullability
>>>> > remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a
>>>> different
>>>> > tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
>>>> > enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs
>>>> in
>>>> > the worker, at minimum.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so
>>>> > we are depending on an active project?
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Kenn
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Cheers,
>>>> > Gleb
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback
>>>
>>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <kl...@google.com>.
When I turned findbugs on for the Dataflow worker, it found a number of
synchronization issues and some other issues around possibly-bad practices
that weren't about nullability. That's the origin of this thread - it
really seemed that there's value added even on top of nullability where the
bytecode analysis approach is actually inferior to source analysis since it
relies crucially on generic support for full expressivity.
As far as nullability + errorprone, my impression is that the best thing to
do is https://github.com/uber/NullAway, and I filed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6555 for that (and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6556 for another, more rigorous
one - I didn't file one for Checker framework which does it in the type
system because it appeared to hang when I tried it)
Kenn
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:20 AM Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> wrote:
> How much of the benefit of FindBugs/SpotBugs over Errorprone is simply
> because we tell FindBugs to assume a default annotation of NonNull (we set
> this in the package-info files). If so, is there no way to tell Errorprone
> to do the same thing?
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:18 AM Scott Wegner <sc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1 And it seems there is a straightforward migration guide:
>> https://spotbugs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/migration.html
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 8:27 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
>>>
>>> https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-November/004321.html
>>>
>>> On 31.01.19 20:17, Anton Kedin wrote:
>>> > It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Anton
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri <ehudm@google.com
>>> > <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > +1 for spotbugs
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gleb@spotify.com
>>> > <ma...@spotify.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in
>>> > error-prone, it's a good addition. There are few conflicts
>>> > between error-prone and spotbugs, for instance, the approach to
>>> > enum switch exhaustiveness, but it can be configured.
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <
>>> iemejia@gmail.com
>>> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for
>>> IntelliJ.
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía
>>> > <iemejia@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
>>> > > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not
>>> > support Java
>>> > > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles
>>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the
>>> > Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors.
>>> > They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others,
>>> > etc. You can see the result at
>>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value,
>>> > beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few
>>> of
>>> > the issues were not nullability related, though nullability
>>> > remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a
>>> different
>>> > tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
>>> > enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in
>>> > the worker, at minimum.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so
>>> > we are depending on an active project?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Kenn
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Gleb
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback
>>
>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Reuven Lax <re...@google.com>.
How much of the benefit of FindBugs/SpotBugs over Errorprone is simply
because we tell FindBugs to assume a default annotation of NonNull (we set
this in the package-info files). If so, is there no way to tell Errorprone
to do the same thing?
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:18 AM Scott Wegner <sc...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 And it seems there is a straightforward migration guide:
> https://spotbugs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/migration.html
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 8:27 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
>>
>> https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-November/004321.html
>>
>> On 31.01.19 20:17, Anton Kedin wrote:
>> > It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Anton
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri <ehudm@google.com
>> > <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > +1 for spotbugs
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gleb@spotify.com
>> > <ma...@spotify.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in
>> > error-prone, it's a good addition. There are few conflicts
>> > between error-prone and spotbugs, for instance, the approach to
>> > enum switch exhaustiveness, but it can be configured.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <
>> iemejia@gmail.com
>> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for
>> IntelliJ.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía
>> > <iemejia@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
>> > > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not
>> > support Java
>> > > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles
>> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the
>> > Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors.
>> > They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others,
>> > etc. You can see the result at
>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>> > > >
>> > > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value,
>> > beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of
>> > the issues were not nullability related, though nullability
>> > remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a different
>> > tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
>> > enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in
>> > the worker, at minimum.
>> > > >
>> > > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so
>> > we are depending on an active project?
>> > > >
>> > > > Kenn
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Gleb
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
> Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback
>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Scott Wegner <sc...@apache.org>.
+1 And it seems there is a straightforward migration guide:
https://spotbugs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/migration.html
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 8:27 AM Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
>
> https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-November/004321.html
>
> On 31.01.19 20:17, Anton Kedin wrote:
> > It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Anton
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri <ehudm@google.com
> > <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for spotbugs
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gleb@spotify.com
> > <ma...@spotify.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in
> > error-prone, it's a good addition. There are few conflicts
> > between error-prone and spotbugs, for instance, the approach to
> > enum switch exhaustiveness, but it can be configured.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <iemejia@gmail.com
> > <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for
> IntelliJ.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía
> > <iemejia@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
> > > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not
> > support Java
> > > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles
> > <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the
> > Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors.
> > They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others,
> > etc. You can see the result at
> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
> > > >
> > > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value,
> > beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of
> > the issues were not nullability related, though nullability
> > remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a different
> > tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
> > enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in
> > the worker, at minimum.
> > > >
> > > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so
> > we are depending on an active project?
> > > >
> > > > Kenn
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Gleb
> >
>
--
Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Maximilian Michels <mx...@apache.org>.
+1
Spotbugs appears to be a fork of Findbugs which is unmaintained:
https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-November/004321.html
On 31.01.19 20:17, Anton Kedin wrote:
> It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
>
> Regards,
> Anton
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri <ehudm@google.com
> <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
>
> +1 for spotbugs
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gleb@spotify.com
> <ma...@spotify.com>> wrote:
>
> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in
> error-prone, it's a good addition. There are few conflicts
> between error-prone and spotbugs, for instance, the approach to
> enum switch exhaustiveness, but it can be configured.
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <iemejia@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía
> <iemejia@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
> > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not
> support Java
> > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles
> <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the
> Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors.
> They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others,
> etc. You can see the result at
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
> > >
> > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value,
> beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of
> the issues were not nullability related, though nullability
> remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a different
> tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
> enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in
> the worker, at minimum.
> > >
> > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so
> we are depending on an active project?
> > >
> > > Kenn
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Gleb
>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Anton Kedin <ke...@google.com>.
It would be nice. How fast is it on Beam codebase?
Regards,
Anton
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:38 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote:
> +1 for spotbugs
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gl...@spotify.com> wrote:
>
>> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
>> it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
>> spotbugs, for instance, the approach to enum switch exhaustiveness, but it
>> can be configured.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
>>> > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
>>> > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java
>>> worker and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but
>>> fixing some uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at
>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>>> > >
>>> > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond
>>> errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not
>>> nullability related, though nullability remains the most obvious
>>> low-hanging fruit where a different tool would do even better than
>>> findbugs. I have not yet enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+
>>> new bugs in the worker, at minimum.
>>> > >
>>> > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are
>>> depending on an active project?
>>> > >
>>> > > Kenn
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Gleb
>>
>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Mikhail Gryzykhin <gr...@gmail.com>.
+1 for spotbugs
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 10:38 Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote:
> +1 for spotbugs
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gl...@spotify.com> wrote:
>
>> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
>> it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
>> spotbugs, for instance, the approach to enum switch exhaustiveness, but it
>> can be configured.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
>>> > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
>>> > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java
>>> worker and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but
>>> fixing some uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at
>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>>> > >
>>> > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond
>>> errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not
>>> nullability related, though nullability remains the most obvious
>>> low-hanging fruit where a different tool would do even better than
>>> findbugs. I have not yet enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+
>>> new bugs in the worker, at minimum.
>>> > >
>>> > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are
>>> depending on an active project?
>>> > >
>>> > > Kenn
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Gleb
>>
>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com>.
+1 for spotbugs
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:09 AM Gleb Kanterov <gl...@spotify.com> wrote:
> Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
> it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
> spotbugs, for instance, the approach to enum switch exhaustiveness, but it
> can be configured.
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
>> > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
>> > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java
>> worker and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but
>> fixing some uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>> > >
>> > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond errorprone
>> and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not nullability
>> related, though nullability remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit
>> where a different tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
>> enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in the worker, at
>> minimum.
>> > >
>> > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are
>> depending on an active project?
>> > >
>> > > Kenn
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Gleb
>
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Gleb Kanterov <gl...@spotify.com>.
Agree, spotbugs brings static checks that aren't covered in error-prone,
it's a good addition. There are few conflicts between error-prone and
spotbugs, for instance, the approach to enum switch exhaustiveness, but it
can be configured.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:53 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
> > Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
> > 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java
> worker and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but
> fixing some uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
> > >
> > > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond errorprone
> and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not nullability
> related, though nullability remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit
> where a different tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet
> enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in the worker, at
> minimum.
> > >
> > > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are depending
> on an active project?
> > >
> > > Kenn
>
--
Cheers,
Gleb
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com>.
Not a blocker but there is not a spotbugs plugin for IntelliJ.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:45 AM Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
> Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
> 11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
> >
> > It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not nullability related, though nullability remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a different tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in the worker, at minimum.
> >
> > Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are depending on an active project?
> >
> > Kenn
Re: Findbugs -> Spotbugs ?
Posted by Ismaël Mejía <ie...@gmail.com>.
YES PLEASE let's move to spotbugs !
Findbugs has not had a new release in ages, and does not support Java
11 either, so this will address another possible issue.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:28 AM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Over the last few hours I activated findbugs on the Dataflow Java worker and fixed or suppressed the errors. They started around 60 but fixing some uncovered others, etc. You can see the result at https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7684.
>
> It has convinced me that findbugs still adds value, beyond errorprone and nullaway/checker/infer. Quite a few of the issues were not nullability related, though nullability remains the most obvious low-hanging fruit where a different tool would do even better than findbugs. I have not yet enable "non null by default" which exposes 100+ new bugs in the worker, at minimum.
>
> Are there known blockers for upgrading to spotbugs so we are depending on an active project?
>
> Kenn