-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 491
[prone] Apply UnnecessaryDefaultInEnumSwitch
#2702
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
Conversation
Pankraz76
commented
Oct 24, 2025
- https://errorprone.info/bugpattern/UnnecessaryDefaultInEnumSwitch
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.
questionnaire.
lib/src/main/java/com/diffplug/spotless/biome/BiomeExecutableDownloader.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
plugin-gradle/src/main/java/com/diffplug/gradle/spotless/GradleProvisioner.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
2b70427 to
0914367
Compare
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.
This is great, I didn't know java had exhaustiveness checks now. I have only one minor nit.
| if (state.type == SPACE) { | ||
| builder.append(" ".repeat(numSpaces)); | ||
| } else if (state.type == TAB) { | ||
| builder.append("\t".repeat(Math.max(0, numSpaces / state.numSpacesPerTab))); |
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 don't see a need for the Math.max(0) part.
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.
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.
we can do the repeat, just not the Math.max.
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.
dont know how to fix it, only can apply the ide suggestion. As this is reoccuring else where just leave as it is and address later on.
c996369 to
83d1b0b
Compare
unrelated rewrite change thats actually an issue imposing dirty state of codebase. |
83d1b0b to
005d1be
Compare
| private FormatterFunc.Closeable toFunc() { | ||
| var runner = new ProcessRunner(); | ||
| return FormatterFunc.Closeable.of(runner, this::format); | ||
| return FormatterFunc.Closeable.of(new ProcessRunner(), this::format); |
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.
| throw new IllegalStateException(yearMode.toString()); | ||
| } | ||
| return new Runtime(headerLazy.get(), delimiter, yearSeparator, updateYear, skipLinesMatching); | ||
| boolean updateYear = switch (yearMode.get()) { |
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.
b9e6a6e to
5d67390
Compare
| * Represents the line endings which should be written by the tool. | ||
| */ | ||
| public enum LineEnding { | ||
| // @formatter:off |
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.
is this something to consider or should it stay be reverted?
| case MAC_CLASSIC: return "\r"; | ||
| default: throw new UnsupportedOperationException(this + " is a path-specific line ending."); | ||
| } | ||
| return switch (this) { |
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.
this code is not touched by spotless anyways had to apply ide to format.
5d67390 to
22911af
Compare
|
Please don't force push! I have to start my review completely over when that happens. With automated tools, you are able to generate diffs in less time than it takes reviewers to review them. For security reasons, I have to review every diff carefully. My goal with Spotless is to not block people who want to contribute, but these refactors are consuming too much of my time right now. Can you maybe open an issue with the remaining improvements you want to make? |
