<Swing Dev> 6179357-related: Working on warnings removal

Alexander Potochkin Alexander.Potochkin at Sun.COM
Mon Sep 3 12:44:21 UTC 2007

Hello Florian
> Hi,
> I decided first to remove some warning for trivial cases, since even if 
> I compile with
> -Xlint:-serial -Xlint:-deprecation -Xlint:-cast -Xlint:-fallthrough 
> -Xmaxwarns 1200
> I get 977 warnings! And since most of them are [unckecked] warnings, 
> it's hard to see, if and where I introduce new [unckecked] warnings, 
> when adding generics.

You are right, unfortunately we have a lot of warnings in compile time

We should have paid more attention to this problem


> Please tell me if somebody else is working on the warnings removal, too.
> -Florian
> Florian Brunner schrieb:
>> Hi Alecander!
>> Thanks for your help. I installed the basic environment and started to 
>> work on this issue.
>> Note that the path at
>> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/source/browse/openjdk/
>> as well as at
>> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/servlets/ProjectSource
>> don't seem to be correct!
>> At
>> |https://openjdk.dev.java.net/svn/openjdk/trunk
>> there's only a www directory!
>> Instead I checked out
>> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/svn/openjdk/jdk/trunk/j2se/
>> Is this the correct path to work on the Swing project?
>> I'will post to this list again when there are more news or questions 
>> arise.
>> -Florian
>> |Alexander Potochkin schrieb:
>>> Hello Florian
>>> Welcome to the swing-dev
>>> The RFE #6179357 is definitely worth investigating
>>> we was going to generify Swing for 1.6
>>> but unfortunately didn't have enough time
>>> Your fixes are welcome
>>> Here is the information how to contribute:
>>> http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/
>>> For now the process is:
>>> Become a contributor
>>> download openJDK
>>> make the fix
>>> ask any related questions on this list
>>> submit a patch
>>> we'll assign a sponsor who we'll review your fix
>>> and put it back when it is done
>>> The whole process will be simplified when we complete moving to 
>>> Mercurial repository
>>> For this RFE you don't need to file JSR
>>> as you mentioned changes should as backward compatible as possible
>>> but we'll need the request to the special committee which keeps track 
>>> of the Java public API, the sponsor will do it for you
>>> Please note that we prefer to make the incremental fixes which fix 
>>> the particular problem, I mean, not to mix e.g. generifying and 
>>> optimization
>>> in one fix but split it to two ones.
>>> >I want my
>>> > progress to be visible by the public. So what is the best strategy? 
>>> Work at
>>> > openjdk.org? Work at SwingLabs? Start a new project at java.net?
>>> The current process doesn't seem to provide much visibility for the 
>>> public. To make it visible I personally would do the following things:
>>> - start a project on java.net
>>> (not sure it helps for this particular case)
>>> - blog about your progress and discuss it with the community
>>> (this is the best way to make your work visible)
>>> Thanks
>>> alexp
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I'm interessted in the RFE "6179357: Request interface 
>>>> javax.swing.tree.TreeModel to have a generic type for nodes". Is 
>>>> there already someone working on this issue? If not I would like to 
>>>> help there.
>>>> I want to address following issues:
>>>> - add generics support to the Swing framework
>>>> - provide support for new language features like varargs
>>>> - provide better support for the collection framework
>>>> - optimize code where reasonable
>>>> Do you think this is a good idea? How probable will such a change 
>>>> make its way to the "official" jdk?
>>>> I sent the signed SCA to Sun. So what would be the next steps? I 
>>>> want my progress to be visible by the public. So what is the best 
>>>> strategy? Work at openjdk.org? Work at SwingLabs? Start a new 
>>>> project at java.net?
>>>> Should I work on a branch of openjdk? Or should I copy the current 
>>>> revision to a new repository? What is the easiest/ best way to get 
>>>> the source back to openjdk?
>>>> Is a JSR needed for such a change? Note: the suggested changes 
>>>> should be backwards compatible (eg. thanks to the "raw type feature" 
>>>> of generics), as far as I can see up to now. (The only exception is 
>>>> of course reflection, which can always break if you change an API).
>>>> Thanks for your help.
>>>> -Florian

More information about the swing-dev mailing list