codenarc-developer Mailing List for CodeNarc (Page 14)
Brought to you by:
chrismair
Menu
▾
▴
codenarc-developer — CodeNarc Developers
This list is closed, nobody may subscribe to it.
| 2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(8) |
May
(17) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(8) |
Nov
(67) |
Dec
(9) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 |
Jan
(23) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(15) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(5) |
Jun
(43) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(18) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(6) |
Dec
|
| 2012 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(7) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(17) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(7) |
Apr
|
May
(6) |
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2014 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2016 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <chr...@wa...> - 2010-05-04 20:26:20
|
I'll get these pulled in today. Thanks for your help and support. Chris "Hamlet D'Arcy" <ham...@gm...> wrote on 05/04/2010 03:52:44 PM: > Hi Chris, > > Not to pressure you too much... but can you be sure that all the > outstanding patches get merged (or let me know what to fix). > > We are planning a hacking night at jax.de and I want to get some new > people writing rules. This means getting those patches merged so that > the more code that is coming doesn't cause issues. > > I have 4 outstanding patches: > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php? > func=detail&aid=2994307&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php? > func=detail&aid=2995420&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php? > func=detail&aid=2995478&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php? > func=detail&aid=2996774&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 > > Happy to do this myself, but would need commit access. > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list > Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > ForwardSourceID:NT000B8C72 |
|
From: Chris M. <chr...@ea...> - 2010-05-04 20:06:50
|
In the "pom.xml", I specify a Gmaven providerSelection of 1.5, which I think compiles it against Groovy 1.5 when doing the Maven build. I intentionally did not "require" Groovy 1.6 or 1.7 to keep backward-compatibility with users still on older versions. I ran into the same situation and had to put extra checks in the tests that skip the individual 1.6-specific tests if running with 1.5 Groovy. But then I could at least change the Groovy version back and forth within IDEA and still run those tests. See the GroovyVersion class. Given that CodeNarc is a tool and not a framework (upon which production code depends), perhaps maintaining compatibility with Groovy 1.5 could be abandoned soon. After all, even if your Groovy app needs 1.5 (sadly like some apps I have at work), you can still run CodeNarc against it using Groovy 1.6/1.7. Chris -----Original Message----- From: Hamlet D'Arcy [mailto:ham...@gm...] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 3:39 PM To: Cod...@li... Subject: Re: [Codenarc-developer] what version of Groovy does codenarc mavenrun against? It looks like the answer is 1.6. What is the issue with upgrading? The rules I've written run just fine in 1.7 but the tests fail in 1.6 because you can't test the anonymous inner or plain old inner classes. -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Hamlet D'Arcy <ham...@gm...> wrote: > what version of Groovy does codenarc maven run against? > > Is this buried in the implementation of GMaven somewhere? > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ Codenarc-developer mailing list Cod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-05-04 19:52:47
|
Hi Chris, Not to pressure you too much... but can you be sure that all the outstanding patches get merged (or let me know what to fix). We are planning a hacking night at jax.de and I want to get some new people writing rules. This means getting those patches merged so that the more code that is coming doesn't cause issues. I have 4 outstanding patches: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2994307&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2995420&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2995478&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2996774&group_id=250145&atid=1126575 Happy to do this myself, but would need commit access. -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-05-04 19:39:06
|
It looks like the answer is 1.6. What is the issue with upgrading? The rules I've written run just fine in 1.7 but the tests fail in 1.6 because you can't test the anonymous inner or plain old inner classes. -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Hamlet D'Arcy <ham...@gm...> wrote: > what version of Groovy does codenarc maven run against? > > Is this buried in the implementation of GMaven somewhere? > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-05-04 19:29:06
|
what version of Groovy does codenarc maven run against? Is this buried in the implementation of GMaven somewhere? -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... |
|
From: <chr...@wa...> - 2010-05-03 11:30:41
|
> As long as the new rule patches from this weekend get merged :) Will do. Thanks for those. :-) |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-05-03 05:38:29
|
I don't have any reason to delay the release. As long as the new rule patches from this weekend get merged :) -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Chris Mair <chr...@ea...> wrote: > My original intent was to put out the next formal release (v0.9) of > CodeNarc in about a week or two. I am quite flexible on the timing. I just > don't want to wait too long -- there are some bug fixes and enhancements > that affect the CodeNarc Grails Plugin as well. > > Let me know if there is any strong desire or motivation to delay the > release. > > Thanks. > Chris > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list > Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > > |
|
From: Chris M. <chr...@ea...> - 2010-05-03 02:05:53
|
My original intent was to put out the next formal release (v0.9) of CodeNarc in about a week or two. I am quite flexible on the timing. I just don't want to wait too long -- there are some bug fixes and enhancements that affect the CodeNarc Grails Plugin as well. Let me know if there is any strong desire or motivation to delay the release. Thanks. Chris |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-05-01 19:07:29
|
Awesome, they all pass now. Thanks a lot. -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Chris Mair <chr...@ea...> wrote: > Hamlet, > > I have checked in changes on the trunk to the two test classes that I > think/hope will fix those broken tests on Linux. When you get a chance, can > you please check and let me know. > > Thanks. > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hamlet D'Arcy [mailto:ham...@gm...] > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:52 AM > To: chr...@wa... > Cc: Cod...@li... > Subject: Re: [Codenarc-developer] file system tests fail on linux > > > Tests in error: > > testAnalyze_FilesOnly(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) > testAnalyze(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) > > testAnalyze_IncludesAndExcludes(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyz > erTest) > > testAnalyze_BaseDirectory_FilesOnly(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAna > lyzerTest) > > testAnalyze_BaseDirectory(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) > > testAnalyze_SourceDirectories(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerT > est) > > testAnalyze_BaseDirectoryAndSourceDirectories(org.codenarc.analyzer.Director > ySourceAnalyzerTest) > > testAnalyze_BaseDirectory_ApplyToFilesMatching(org.codenarc.analyzer.Directo > rySourceAnalyzerTest) > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:59 PM, <chr...@wa...> wrote: >> >> Which specific tests? >> >> Chris >> >> "Hamlet D'Arcy" <ham...@gm...> wrote on 04/29/2010 03:14:13 PM: >> >>> I get test failures on linux. >>> >>> the culprits are the unit tests doing all those assertions about the >>> file system. The results need to be properly sorted. the order of the >>> file system listing is coming back different than defined. >>> >>> -- >>> Hamlet D'Arcy >>> ham...@gm... >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> --------- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Codenarc-developer mailing list >>> Cod...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer >> >>> ForwardSourceID:NT000B847A >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Codenarc-developer mailing list >> Cod...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer >> >> > > > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > > |
|
From: Chris M. <chr...@ea...> - 2010-05-01 17:14:28
|
Hamlet, I have checked in changes on the trunk to the two test classes that I think/hope will fix those broken tests on Linux. When you get a chance, can you please check and let me know. Thanks. Chris -----Original Message----- From: Hamlet D'Arcy [mailto:ham...@gm...] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:52 AM To: chr...@wa... Cc: Cod...@li... Subject: Re: [Codenarc-developer] file system tests fail on linux Tests in error: testAnalyze_FilesOnly(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_IncludesAndExcludes(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyz erTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectory_FilesOnly(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAna lyzerTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectory(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_SourceDirectories(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerT est) testAnalyze_BaseDirectoryAndSourceDirectories(org.codenarc.analyzer.Director ySourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectory_ApplyToFilesMatching(org.codenarc.analyzer.Directo rySourceAnalyzerTest) On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:59 PM, <chr...@wa...> wrote: > > Which specific tests? > > Chris > > "Hamlet D'Arcy" <ham...@gm...> wrote on 04/29/2010 03:14:13 PM: > >> I get test failures on linux. >> >> the culprits are the unit tests doing all those assertions about the >> file system. The results need to be properly sorted. the order of the >> file system listing is coming back different than defined. >> >> -- >> Hamlet D'Arcy >> ham...@gm... >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --------- >> _______________________________________________ >> Codenarc-developer mailing list >> Cod...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > >> ForwardSourceID:NT000B847A > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------- > > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list > Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > > -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ Codenarc-developer mailing list Cod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-04-30 06:51:42
|
Tests in error: testAnalyze_FilesOnly(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_IncludesAndExcludes(org.codenarc.analyzer.FilesystemSourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectory_FilesOnly(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectory(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_SourceDirectories(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectoryAndSourceDirectories(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) testAnalyze_BaseDirectory_ApplyToFilesMatching(org.codenarc.analyzer.DirectorySourceAnalyzerTest) On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:59 PM, <chr...@wa...> wrote: > > Which specific tests? > > Chris > > "Hamlet D'Arcy" <ham...@gm...> wrote on 04/29/2010 03:14:13 PM: > >> I get test failures on linux. >> >> the culprits are the unit tests doing all those assertions about the >> file system. The results need to be properly sorted. the order of the >> file system listing is coming back different than defined. >> >> -- >> Hamlet D'Arcy >> ham...@gm... >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Codenarc-developer mailing list >> Cod...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > >> ForwardSourceID:NT000B847A > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list > Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > > -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... |
|
From: <chr...@wa...> - 2010-04-29 22:54:52
|
Which specific tests? Chris "Hamlet D'Arcy" <ham...@gm...> wrote on 04/29/2010 03:14:13 PM: > I get test failures on linux. > > the culprits are the unit tests doing all those assertions about the > file system. The results need to be properly sorted. the order of the > file system listing is coming back different than defined. > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list > Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > ForwardSourceID:NT000B847A |
|
From: <chr...@wa...> - 2010-04-29 20:29:32
|
Hmmmm. Should features (and bugs) be closed when they are fixed or when they are actually delivered in a release? I have been closing them when they are finally delivered within a release. How do other projects do it? I was trying to figure out what Grails does in that regard. Chris "Hamlet D'Arcy" <ham...@gm...> wrote on 04/29/2010 03:12:48 PM: > I think the two features/defects I created need to be marked closed. > > The synchronization rules and the finalizersOnExit rule. > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Codenarc-developer mailing list > Cod...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-developer > ForwardSourceID:NT000B8476 |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-04-29 19:14:21
|
I get test failures on linux. the culprits are the unit tests doing all those assertions about the file system. The results need to be properly sorted. the order of the file system listing is coming back different than defined. -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-04-29 19:12:57
|
I think the two features/defects I created need to be marked closed. The synchronization rules and the finalizersOnExit rule. -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... |
|
From: <chr...@wa...> - 2010-04-28 11:31:05
|
>> I think it is a concurrency issue. Here is the deprecated message from >> the Javadoc: >> >> "This method is inherently unsafe. It may result in finalizers being >> called on live objects while other threads are concurrently >> manipulating those objects, resulting in erratic behavior or >> deadlock." >> >> Hamlet D'Arcy Ok, that makes sense. I will move it to the (new) Concurrency ruleset. Chris |
|
From: Hamlet D'A. <ham...@gm...> - 2010-04-28 06:53:03
|
I think it is a concurrency issue. Here is the deprecated message from the Javadoc: "This method is inherently unsafe. It may result in finalizers being called on live objects while other threads are concurrently manipulating those objects, resulting in erratic behavior or deadlock." -- Hamlet D'Arcy ham...@gm... On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Chris Mair <chr...@ea...> wrote: >>> I think the new rules should go under a category called "concurrency" > > I agree. I was thinking the same thing after sending my email. This deserves > a category all by itself. > > What about your SystemRunFinalizersOnExit rule? That's not really > concurrency. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hamlet D'Arcy [mailto:ham...@gm...] > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 12:51 AM > To: Chris Mair > Subject: Re: CodeNarc 0.8.1 - New rules > > > I think the new rules should go under a category called "concurrency", but I > was too lazy to create a new group... I just wanted to get my rules done and > go to bed. I definitely plan on creating a few more rules around concurrency > so that there is a more full-featured concurrency set. I would recommend > moving the rules to concurrency but maybe waiting a few days to see if I > really do have the time to create them :) > > I was pretty surprised how easy it was to create a tested rule. The only > hangup was the integration tests failing on a giant HTML page comparison (i > think). > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Chris Mair <chr...@ea...> wrote: >> Hamlet, >> >> Awesome! So far I have collaborated with a few other developers by >> individual email, but that was mostly just discussions. Yours is the >> first formal submission of a completed rule + tests. >> >> I was intending on creating a new "Design" ruleset. Would your rules >> be as appropriate there as in "Basic"? I had modeled the basic ruleset >> on PMD -- those rules are considered "universal". That being said, the >> categorization into rulesets is inevitably fuzzy and somewhat >> ambiguous. >> >> I just created codenarc-developer and codenarc-user mailing lists on >> SourceForge. So far, there are no publicly available rules that I am >> aware of outside the CodeNarc distribution. >> >> Thanks. >> Chris >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Hamlet D'Arcy [mailto:ham...@gm...] >> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 2:59 AM >> To: chr...@ea... >> Subject: Re: [groovy-user] [ANN] Announcing CodeNarc 0.8.1 >> >> >> Hi Chris, >> >> I am interested in writing some CodeNarc rules. >> >> Is there a mailing list somewhere? >> How does the community collaborate? >> Are there any community rules that are not part of the core product? >> >> -- >> Hamlet D'Arcy >> ham...@gm... >> >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Chris Mair <chr...@ea...> >> wrote: >>> CodeNarc is a static analysis tool for Groovy source code. >>> >>> >>> >>> Version 0.8.1 is a bug-fix release and addresses some >>> incompatibilities and bugs that crept in related to changes across >>> Groovy 1.6 and 1.7: >>> >>> >>> >>> Bug Fixes >>> >>> Fix Bug #2943025: “NestedBlockDepthRule: Produces erroneous results >>> on Groovy 1.6.x.” >>> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2943025&group_id=250 >>> 1 >>> 45&atid=1126573 >>> Fix Bug #2943028: “PackageNameRule may show incorrect violations for >> classes >>> within the default package when running in Groovy 1.6.x.” >>> >> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2943028&group_id=2501 >> 45&ati >> d=1126573 >>> Fix Bug #2935587 "Building CodeNarc 0.8 fails." - Problem from Joern >> Huxhorn >>> (Jan 18, 2010) – Unable to build from the downloaded >>> CodeNarc-0.8-bin.tar.gz. >>> >> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2935587&group_id=25014 >> 5&atid >> =1126573. >>> Fix StackOverflow in Groovy 1.7.0 for some rules: All rules that >>> implement the visitVariableExpression(VariableExpression expression) >>> visitor method: UnusedVariableRule, UnusedPrivateFieldRule, >>> GrailsSessionReferenceRule, GrailsServletContextReferenceRule – >>> Removed call to >>> super.visitVariableExpression(expression) since that seems to cause >> problems >>> (StackOverflow) in Groovy 1.7.0. >>> DuplicateImportRule: Document that this rule does not work when >>> running under Groovy 1.7 (i.e., will not produce any violations), and >>> does not distinguish between multiple duplicate imports for the same >>> class. >>> >>> http://codenarc.sourceforge.net >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- > Hamlet D'Arcy > ham...@gm... > > |
|
From: Chris M. <chr...@ea...> - 2010-04-27 02:13:30
|
This is the mailing list for CodeNarc developers. See https://sourceforge.net/projects/codenarc/. |
