ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Code inspection
Date Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:38:36 GMT
Hi Petr,

Could you please take inspections and run it on AI code base in
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 19:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>:

> Alexey, thank you for bring this topic to top.
>
> What do you think about committing this inspections into Ignite code base?
>
> What can be our next steps after demonstrating CI check is possible
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
>  ?
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 15:28, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com
> >:
>
>> Bumping up.
>>
>> Attached is my local inspections profile exported from Idea. Let's run
>> the first iteration and check if it differs significantly from other
>> community members.
>>
>> --AG
>>
>> 2018-03-19 16:39 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985 <
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985> [1].
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On 18 Mar 2018, at 00:56, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hello Petr,
>>> >
>>> > Many members of the community would appreciate such additional code
>>> control, and it's a pity that no one made this happen. Agree?
>>> >
>>> > Could you please pick up this activity?
>>> >
>>> > It might be an idea to create 'IDEA Inspections' step to be run in
>>> parallel with 'Build Apache Ignite'. WDYT? Would it work?
>>> >
>>> > Sincerely,
>>> > Dmitriy Pavlov
>>> >
>>>
>> > https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections <
>>> https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > пн, 12 мар. 2018 г. в 14:37, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>
>>> > Hi Dmitriy,
>>> >
>>> > would you pick up this activity?
>>> >
>>> > Sincerely,
>>> > Dmitriy Pavlov
>>> >
>>>
>> > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:09, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>
>>> > What I can suggest now it is to take XML file with existing as is from
>>> previous topic (I remember someone in community already prepared settings)
>>> and set up TeamCity Run configuration as part of Run All Basic Tests (per
>>> commit basis).
>>> >
>>> > If we don’t have XML, I suggest to enable build-in Idea inspections
>>> 'as is' on TeamCity and iteratively improve it according to found issues.
>>> >
>>> > Dmitriy G., would you prepare PR and proof-of-concept TC run
>>> configuration?
>>> >
>>> > As discussion became really active, I think that means community is
>>> interested in static code checks.
>>> >
>>>
>> > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:08, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>
>>> > I was thinking about some quick check, which will automatically
>>> require minimum runs. Now, any committer can push changes to the master,
>>> which break not only the inspection and style, but even the compilation. If
>>> this control would be automatic, it can allow us make codebase better quite
>>> fast. But I am afraid it is not realistic.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>> > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:42, Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com <mailto:
>>> mr.weider@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>
>>> > Sonar is powerful, yes, but it’s power in thoroughness. I.e. it does
>>> its job well in cases of leisurely post-build analysis.
>>> >
>>> > I’d suggest we use it (if we will use it) in the following scenarios:
>>> >  — some basic checks Sonar profile for Blocker bugs (it is fast) —
>>> something that cannot be passed to master;
>>> >  — nightly or even weekly run with Full Sonar profile (600+ checks
>>> from Firebug, Codestyle, Coverage, etc.) for regression and overall code
>>> quality improvement goals.
>>> >
>>> > Did not quite get you about push-to-master prohibition. Can you
>>> explain scenario in more details?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > On 6 Mar 2018, at 13:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Petr, I've heard Sonar is powerful tool.
>>> > >
>>> > > Would it help us to prohibit commits to master w/o test run / too
>>> much
>>> > > failed tests / too much inspection errors appeared?
>>> > >
>>>
>> > > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:22, Alexey Goncharuk <
>>> alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com <mailto:alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>
>>> > >
>>> > >> Dmitriy,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I like this idea a lot. For example, the inspection profile should
>>> have
>>> > >> inspection 'Anonymous class can be converted to lambda' disabled
>>> because
>>> > >> quite a lot of such classes can be sent over the network (although
>>> even
>>> > >> anonymous classes are discourage for such purposes).
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I believe we can start with sharing somehow one of the profiles
and
>>> then
>>> > >> iteratively improving it until the community is satisfied with
the
>>> result.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Thoughts?
>>> > >>
>>>
>> > >> 2018-03-06 12:06 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com <mailto:
>>> mr.weider@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>> We can use Sonar as instrument for code analysis and test coverage
>>> > >>> inspections.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>> On 6 Mar 2018, at 11:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
>>> > >>> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com <mailto:dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Dmitriy,
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> As I understood, preview topic was of static code analysis
in
>>> general.
>>> > >>>> In this topic, I want to discuss only idea inspection rule.
>>> > >>>> In future, of course, we can expаnd this rule to the TeamCity
>>> build.
>>> > >>>>
>>>
>> > >>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Nikolay Izhikov <
>>> nizhikov@apache.org <mailto:nizhikov@apache.org>>
>>
>>
>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>> Hello, Igniters.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> +1 to automatic code style tools.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Let's make it already!
>>> > >>>>> Do we have a ticket for it?
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Related discussion -
>>>
>> > >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble <
>>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble/>.
>>
>>
>>> > >>>>> com/Static-code-analysis-for-Java-td22195.html
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> В Вт, 06/03/2018 в 08:15 +0000, Dmitry Pavlov пишет:
>>> > >>>>>> Hi Dmitriy,
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> I think we should resurrect thread about addition
of code
>>> > >> inspections,
>>> > >>>>> and
>>> > >>>>>> later we can enable automatic control step to TeamCity.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Could you help me to find it?
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 11:11, Dmitriy Govorukhin
<
>>>
>> > >>>>> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com <mailto:dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
>>> >
>>
>>
>>> > >>>>>>> :
>>> > >>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> Do we have 'inspection' [1] scheme for ignite?
>>> > >>>>>>> I see a lot of warnings in my code, and I guess
it is because
>>> > >> everyone
>>> > >>>>> uses
>>> > >>>>>>> different schemes.
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> Let's start the discussion.
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> [1] IDEA inspection
>>>
>> > >>>>>>> <https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html
<
>>> https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html>>
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message