Re: [Clirr-devel] MethodSetCheck: changing argument count

[Simon K. <si...@ec...>]

On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 07:05, Lars K=FChne wrote:
> Maybe it would be a bit easier to implement if we'd only apply the=20
> heuristic if the original method does not override anything? That would=
=20
> result in
>=20
> (1)
>   ERROR: Changed X(a) to X(b,c)
> (2)
>   INFO: Removed method X(a), method now in superclass/interface
>   INFO: Added method X(b,c)
>=20
> I think in the "non-override" case the message is much better than=20
> "removed, added", and I'd like to keep it if possible with reasonable=20
> implementation efforts.

I agree with that. I'll try to change the code so that we check for
"overriding" before attempting to use the similarity table. If the
changed method used to override a method we go for remove/add else we
use the existing code.

>=20
> >I was browsing through the clirr bugtracker, and found this issue from
> >Stephen Colebourne which is about just this problem:
> >
> >http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=3Ddetail&aid=3D967288&gr=
oup_id=3D89627&atid=3D590802
> >
> >In this case, he definitely wanted to see "added + removed" rather tha=
n
> >"changed".=20
> > =20
> >
>=20
> Yes. Unfortunately I can't find the request/email that led me to=20
> implementing the heuristic... :-(

I hate it when that happens :-)


Cheers,

Simon