Community
Participate
Working Groups
There are several Discouraged access warnings in jdt.core.tests.model in the official build, such as the latest: http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops4/I20161205-2000/compilelogs/plugins/org.eclipse.jdt.debug_3.11.0.v20161130-0636/jdimodel.jar.html#DISCOURAGED_WARNINGS Currently in dev environment this is set to ignore, so we don't see them. When we have time, we should look at these and either fix these or make an exception for this project in tycho set up.
And here's the link for jdt.core.tests.model: http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops4/I20161205-2000/compilelogs/plugins/org.eclipse.jdt.core.tests.model_3.10.300.v20161205-1547/@dot.html :) Of course that link will go stale soon. Extracting the the first few from a long list, the warnings affect references to - org.eclipse.jdt.internal.formatter.DefaultCodeFormatter - fields of DefaultCodeFormatterOptions - org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.impl.CompilerOptions - org.eclipse.jdt.internal.core.search.matching.PatternLocator - org.eclipse.jdt.internal.core.ClasspathEntry - ... > Currently in dev environment this is set to ignore, so we don't see them. Should we just change our settings to "warning"? Otherwise, with latest compiler when we use @SuppressWarnings("restriction"), we'd get the following info as the answer: At least one of the problems in category 'restriction' is not analysed due to a compiler option being ignored :)
I quickly pondered about added core.tests.model to the x-friends of the corresponding packages, but so far we don't use x-friends for tests, only for things like APT and API tools. Is that a conscious decision or mere coincidence?
(In reply to Stephan Herrmann from comment #2) > I quickly pondered about added core.tests.model to the x-friends of the > corresponding packages, but so far we don't use x-friends for tests, only > for things like APT and API tools. Is that a conscious decision or mere > coincidence? Not sure. Will there be any problems for consumers of jdt.core in the absence of test.model bundles? (In reply to Stephan Herrmann from comment #1) > Should we just change our settings to "warning"? There are quite a few places to fix and more than 4000 warnings as of today. Do you see problems with making the tycho build reflect our dev environment preference of "ignore" ?
(In reply to Jay Arthanareeswaran from comment #3) > There are quite a few places to fix and more than 4000 warnings as of today. > Do you see problems with making the tycho build reflect our dev environment > preference of "ignore" ? Even if 4000 warnings can be silenced by - say - 50 class-level @SW, telling tycho to be more lenient sounds fine to me.
bulk move out of 4.8
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. -- The automated Eclipse Genie.
