Unnecessary @SuppressWarnings java warnings after upgrade

[lennylucas]

After upgrading to version 0.4.18 we've started receiving a load of Java warnings like so:

Unnecessary @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")

[joelittlejohn]

I think these are caused by the annotations added during the dynamic properties work. Could you give an example of the code block?

[joelittlejohn]

For reference, the see #386. Note, these dynamic properties will not be on by default in the next release.

In the meantime, if you want to suppress this code entirely, you can set includeDynamicAccessors to false.

[lennylucas]

Thanks Joe. Will look at that property. Example code below.

    @SuppressWarnings({
        "unchecked"
    })
    protected Object declaredPropertyOrNotFound(String name, Object notFoundValue) {
        switch (name) {
            case "paf":
                return getPaf();
            case "address_base":
                return getAddressBase();
            default:
                return notFoundValue;
        }
    }

    @SuppressWarnings({
        "unchecked"
    })
    public<T >T get(String name) {
        Object value = declaredPropertyOrNotFound(name, AdditionalIds.NOT_FOUND_VALUE);
        if (AdditionalIds.NOT_FOUND_VALUE!= value) {
            return ((T) value);
        } else {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException((("property \""+ name)+"\" is not defined"));
        }
    }

    @SuppressWarnings({
        "unchecked"
    })
    public void set(String name, Object value) {
        if (!declaredProperty(name, value)) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException((("property \""+ name)+"\" is not defined"));
        }
    }

    @SuppressWarnings({
        "unchecked"
    })
    public AdditionalIds with(String name, Object value) {
        if (!declaredProperty(name, value)) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException((("property \""+ name)+"\" is not defined"));
        }
        return this;
    }

[ctrimble]

Those are definitely caused by that include dynamic accessors feature. I will see about moving them from the method signatures to the call sites. That should make them only present when casting happens.