codenarc-developer

[Chris M. <chr...@ea...>]

Regarding this issue:

 

https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail
<https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3376518&group_id=250145&at
id=1126573> &aid=3376518&group_id=250145&atid=1126573

 

The UnnecessaryBigDecimalInstantiation recommends rewriting new
BigDecimal("42") as 42G, but this will produce a BigInteger, not a
BigDecimal.
The same issue exists for new BigDecimal(42) and BigDecimal(42L). Both
recommend replacing with 42G.

 

I am inclined to have the UnnecessaryBigDecimalInstantiation not produce
violations for new BigDecimal(42), new BigDecimal(42L) or new
BigDecimal("42") - i.e., when the parameter evaluates to an integer/long.

 

Any objection?

 

Chris