Java: Improve UselessTypeTest.ql #5711
Draft
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
Marcono1234
force-pushed
the
marcono1234/useless-type-test
branch
3 times, most recently
from
7b24846 to
8ef64a8
Compare
Marcono1234
force-pushed
the
marcono1234/useless-type-test
branch
from
8ef64a8 to
eee4f33
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Notable changes:
Uses
optionsfile for tests because parameterized types (e.g.List<String>) are apparently not permitted as tested type in Java 8 but are allowed in later Java versions (maybe wheninstanceofpattern matching was added?).Currently the added test has non-source types in the expected test results (e.g.
Object.class). CodeQL CLI warns about this and it does not work well for all operating systems (see #5712). While this could in parts be solved by declaring own classes in source and using them instead, it cannot be solved for the array checks.Should I simply omit those?