Hi Micah, Thanks for bringing this up.
I am +1 for all of them. Especially the lack of documentation in the the classes is a little hard - i found myself checking documentation of corresponding C++ classes to understand format initially. Lets wait a couple of days for more feedback and create actionable JIRAs for the same? Thx. On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:34 AM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Java Arrow-Developers, > I've been looking more into the java code base and I was wondering if > people think any of the following might be worthwhile (or are strictly > against them). My java infrastructure knowledge is a little stale, so if a > suggestion I make is absolutely ridiculous I apologize. > > 1. Upgrade to JUnit 5 (the main advantage I know if is it has much cleaner > syntax for asserts with Java8) [1] > 2. Try to get a state where we can enforce with Checkstyle that at least > every class has a javadoc comment? > 3. Try to get the code to state where it shows no warnings in IntelliJ. > At least in the Vector classes there seem to at least be warning about > possibly making some methods/classes have more restricted visibility, I > don't know if this due to insufficient test coverage or if they are > legitimate. If it is the former, is there someplace we can pull in more > tests to exercise the code? > 4. Setup static type checking assuming NonNull values and annotate where > values can be null (based on limited research [2][3][4] the checker > framework might have the right set of annotations to use > > Thanks, > Micah > > > > [1] > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40268446/junit-5-how-to-assert-an-exception-is-thrown > [2] https://github.com/google/guava/issues/3031 > [3] https://github.com/google/guava/issues/2960 > [4] > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4963300/which-notnull-java-annotation-should-i-use >
