| Warnings in CDT [message #61236] |
Wed, 05 February 2003 14:20  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: spam.eclipse.mooreclan.us
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2CD08.A6C20200
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I just checked out the HEAD rev of cdt and have gotten it to compile. =
What concerns me is that there are a large number of warnings "The =
static method/field Xxx from the type Yyy should be accessed in a static =
way"
For example, at line 35 in CStructurizer.java, the ReInit method is =
accessed by dereferencing fParser. Shouldn't
fParser.ReInit(lpiStream);
look more like this:
CPPParser.ReInit(lpiStream);
While I'm at it, shouldn't developers that checkin code with compiler =
warnings be threatened with bamboo shoots under their fingernails?
-MM (mark.moore@notlimited.com)
------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2CD08.A6C20200
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I just checked out the HEAD rev of cdt =
and have=20
gotten it to compile. What concerns me is that there are a large =
number of=20
warnings "The static method/field Xxx from the type Yyy should be =
accessed in a=20
static way"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For example, at line 35 in =
CStructurizer.java, the=20
ReInit method is accessed by dereferencing fParser. =
Shouldn't</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> <FONT=20
size=3D2>fParser.ReInit(lpiStream);</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>look more like this:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> <FONT=20
size=3D2>CPPParser.ReInit(lpiStream);</FONT></FONT></DIV >
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>While I'm at it, shouldn't developers =
that checkin=20
code with compiler warnings be threatened with bamboo shoots under their =
fingernails?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>-MM=20
(mark.moore@notlimited.com)</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2CD08.A6C20200--
|
|
|
|
| Re: Warnings in CDT [message #61384 is a reply to message #61264] |
Thu, 06 February 2003 15:57  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: alain.no.spam
Ed Burnette wrote:
> I believe that warning used to be turned off by default in Eclipse 2.0.x
> where CDT was originally developed. I had the same problem and "fixed" it by
> turning the warning back off. Personally I don't see the problem with
> accessing static things in a non-static way - why should I have to care if
> the programmer made them static or not?
> Don't be suprised if you see a few 'deprecated' warnings too. Unlike the
> main body (Platform SDK) of Eclipse, CDT currently has to work with more
> than one version of Eclipse so it doesn't have the luxury of upgrading to
> new interfaces that might not be there in old versions of Eclipse.
Agree 300 % with this.
Warnings are indicators from the compiler, not end goals.
As the developers move to 2.1, they clean up when necessary.
We did the same drill when doing Eclipse-1.x --> Eclipse-2.0.x
Second point, the bulk of warnings is actually
generated code by JavaCC(think yacc/lex), CPPParser.java.
This code is automatically generated so, you do not want
to mess with it.
> "Mark Moore" <spam.eclipse@mooreclan.us> wrote in message
> news:b1rmtv$ri4$1@rogue.oti.com...
> > I just checked out the HEAD rev of cdt and have gotten it to compile.
> What concerns me is that there are a large
> > number of warnings "The static method/field Xxx from the type Yyy should
> be accessed in a static way"
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03773 seconds
Home