Replace jsr305's CheckReturnValue with Error Prone's #11811
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We should avoid jsr305 and error prone's has the same semantics. Fixes grpc#8687
|
CC @kluever (I also plan to send out GuardedBy soon.) |
|
Awesome! @graememorgan is currently working on this inside of google3 as well. |
larry-safran
approved these changes
Jan 9, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We should avoid jsr305 and error prone's has the same semantics.
Fixes #8687
I'm aware there's plenty of other similar annotations. I'm taking them one-at-a-time because error prone's don't always have the same semantics and if we need to revert the changes for one annotation and I don't want to revert it for all of them.
I'm not planning to fully-remove jsr305 at the moment, just get things in a better state. This was prompted by seeing a glimpse of hope (google/guava#7571). I don't know why we didn't migrate this annotation earlier, though, other than it didn't get us anything directly.