-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 70
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
[WIP] resolve SonarCloud violations #221
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we move these comments to the Javadoc?
Maybe copy the first sentence from sonar's javadoc (if there is one) and append a note saying it was copied from and use
{@link ExternalDescriptionLoader#loadHtmlDescriptions(NewRepository, String)}
instead of url to github.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, we can but shouldn't we also move https://github.com/checkstyle/sonar-checkstyle/blob/master/src/main/java/org/sonar/plugins/checkstyle/CheckstyleRulesDefinition.java#L73 to the Javadoc as it follows the same?
However, I don't quite understand what you mean with
{@link ExternalDescriptionLoader#loadHtmlDescriptions(NewRepository, String)}
?Because for now, this class still exists, just like
loadNames
(see link before) still existed until they removed some of their deprecated code. I assume this will happen here as well, meaningExternalDescriptionLoader
won't exist at some point anymore.Both methods don't have any Javadoc in
sslr-squid-bridge
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes I like that.
Ok, URL has tag in it so it will never go bad unless github goes away.
{@link
was just a javadoc tag that would take user to that method if they clicked on it like in an IDE. If class/method does go away, javadoc tool should print an error on the{@link
as it won't point to a valid class.I was mainly just pointing its usage since I feel it is a better way to point to a class/method in a javadoc. If everyone wants to stay with URL, I am fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@muhlba91 , it this discussion point resolved ?
If yes, please pin @rnveach to approve PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It has not been resolved.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For this point I was waiting for a decision if we want to put dead Javadoc links in or stick with GitHub URL references?
I'm good with both ways but we should still keep the URL somewhere as well for a full reference to where the code was taken from (incl.
sslr-squid-bridge
version). Otherwise, you won't really know from where/when the code was taken over and whether it was modified by us already or not.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see no reason in reference of javadoc in other project, especially to non-existing code (non-existing javadoc).
Please move link from single comment to loadHtmlDescriptions javadoc styles comment. Please do the same in "loadNames". Simply move whole text of comment to javadoc (no extra descriptions are required.)