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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Issue #12210: Add method to ignore unstable checker framework violations #12215
Issue #12210: Add method to ignore unstable checker framework violations #12215
Changes from all commits
b2bd6b6
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Why didn't we do this in the constructor? This is suppose to be an immutable class.
Would also save on execution time, as this gets run probably every time a new entry gets added to the set for nearly everything in the set multiple times.
We obviously don't care about the numbers anyways.
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 still is, the original field is not modified.
It will only run for unstable mutations, only a few of them are there.
I feel it would be better if we don't modify the original error itself.
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.
Will numbers that were an issue always be 3 digits? Maybe consider changing the regexp to just match 3 digit numbers.
Also why not match the
#
too?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.
No, they are not, see the updated issue description, we have entries like
temp-var-20910
Not possible as we have entries like
temp-var-20910
, also if we could do it, there is no point in doing it, would increase the complexity of regex unnecessarily.