Is their a way to prevent Eclipse from building or compiling a project if unsolved warnings exist? I'm very lazy and know I am likely to ignore feedback from tools like checkstyle, so I was thinking it could be useful to force correct code before compiling.
Do you think this is a good idea? Do you know how I might do this in eclipse?
Thanks.
Eclipse
In the Preferences window, under Java|Compiler|Errors/Warnings, each of the various types of problems can be set to Ignore, Warning, or Error. You can change any or all of them to Error.
At the bottom of the page is a checkbox for:
Treat above errors like fatal compile errors (make compiled code not executable).
So, decide what messages you want to fail your build, and check that last checkbox.
Non-Eclipse Use
If you want to use checkstyle, findbugs, or pmd and have them fail your build, you will have to depend on an external build tool like Ant, Maven, or Gradle. You can create <checkstyle>, <findbugs> or <pmd> tasks, and have your real <package> target depend on them; that way if the audit task requires compilation, the target allows it, but you'll never get a [ejw]ar file out of it.
It's actually a good idea to have a build system that does not depend on the IDE. You may want to use a CI system, for example.
Related
I have an infrastructure project that contains other projects as resources. (Because it compiles them on the fly). One of those contained projects is deliberately one that fails to compile.
This makes the entire project show in eclipse as "with errors".
How can I make sbt-eclipse configure eclipse such that e.g. anything under src/main/resources/foo should be ignored?
Of course this isn't exactly the scenario eclipse was built for, but might there be some clean way around it? as much as it matters, sbt itself does not try to compile these resources.
If not, maybe a way to tell eclipse to not even load source
directories under src/main/resources?
Thanks!
Introduction
I have spend a lot of time to fix this bug
In our application we have a lot of generated code by cxf and jaxb which produces tons of warnings. We use the maven-build-helper plugin to add this code to our projects automatically.
By adding this enhancement, eclipse JDT enabled the possibility to set the javac -nowarn flag for specific source folders. Unluckily, by updating the maven project the flag gets lost. There are a few threads on SO where users got bugged by bug.
What I have tried so far
So i came up with a clever solution, javac has a nowarn flag. I set it to my maven-compiler-plugin and specified the directory. My maven build was fine, but my eclipse build wasn't. My research told me, that eclipse jdt does only use the maven-compiler-plugin source and target version. So my next step was to try to configure the EclipseCompiler, but this is not possible, because there is no possibility to add custom compiler Arguments in eclipse JDT.
Next Step. Inside of the .classpath file, eclipse JDT adds an ignore_optional_problems attribute for each ignored path. By updating the maven project inside of eclipse, this entry gets lost. So i started to write a maven "ignore-source-folder" plugin which should add the missing attribute. To run the plugin each time eclipse starts a build, i also created a m2e connector to refresh the .classpath file and everything should be fine.
By testing my plugin with my connector i realized, it works, but only 70% of the repetitions.
What happened?
Every time eclipse m2e/Jdt starts a new build, all classpath entries will be removed and populated again. When my maven plugin gets triggered by eclipse, a race condition starts.
So I started to analyze the code of jdt and m2e jdt. The ignore_optional_problems flag gets only once set manually inside of the patch which was provided to JDT and isn't stored somewhere else. By triggering a new build via m2e-jdt this information gets lost.
How to fix this problem
To fix this problem, some element has to be added or extended in jdt which contains all ignored folders. If a new build gets triggered and the classpath file gets newly generated by m2e-jdt this element should be checked for ignored paths. ClasspathEntryDescriptor seems to be a good place for it.
My problem
I checked out jdt and m2e jdt, but i have tons of errors inside of my IDE and i have no idea how to start. And even if I fix the code, I have no idea how to build and test it. I think my effort will be to high and we talk about 20 or 30 simple lines of code.
I am afraid if I add my results to the filed bug at eclipse, no one will care about it.
So, is there any developer able and willing to help me for this tiny job?
You need to "fix" the M2E's JDT project configurator. Probably somewhere in the m2e-core project. So, your change should obtain some kind of configuration flag from the project pom and create corresponding classpath entries for JDT.
I am trying to set a breakpoint in a Scala Macro implementation using the Eclipse IDE and failing
Firstly: Scala Macros Rock! Up to now I have preferred Clojure to Scala, but with macros I'm no longer sure
I'm trying to create a macro that will return the toString of a function and the function itself. When that works I'm going to make a new function with a sensible toString. Ah happy days.
But I need to be able to debug the macros. I use Eclipse (20110615-0604), with Scala (2.10.1). I downloaded the scala-compiler-2.10.1.jar and the code from http://www.warski.org/blog/2012/12/starting-with-scala-macros-a-short-tutorial/ now works. I've written a couple of simple macros as well. The macros are in an eclipse project "ScalaMacro" and the code that uses them is in a separate project "HelloScalaMacro"
I'd now like to debug them
Following the instructions at http://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/macros/overview.html I have created a runtime configuration with scala.tools.nsc.Main as the entry point. I've added -cp HelloScala.scala, and when I run the configuration it actually seems to compile the code (if I put errors in, it reports the errors correctly).
Unfortunately the instructions imply that a breakpoint in the macro implementation should cause Eclipse to pause. It doesn't.
I've done the usual: google search for Eclipse/Scala macro/Debug/Breakpoint, read all the stackoverflow questions in the scala-macro tag, and played around a lot with every eclipse setting I can find.
So if any of you out there know how to set breakpoints, could you let me know how: is it an eclipse version / scala version / ... issue?
I haven't tried this myself, and in principle it is as likely (or more likely) to fail as what you've already tried, but if successful it could be more convenient to you.
To try this you should have Scala-IDE along with the source feature installed. Make sure you are working off of an Eclipse installation that is either "Eclipse Classic", "Eclipse for RCP Developers", or a similar concoction you came up with on your own.
You will also want to install the Equinox Weaving Launcher plugin, that will allow you to create an "Eclipse Application with Equinox Weaving" launchers.
Now:
Create a new workspace
Create a Scala project
Plant your macro code in that project
Add a break point in the macro source
Getting ready to debug:
Create a new "Eclipse Application with Equinox Weaving" debug launch configuration. Give a name more elegant than "New_configuration".
under "location", point it towards a new different workspace directory
under the "configuration" tab, provide something like "-Xmx1536m"
By default, all plugins available to your running Eclipse instance should be available to the instance you are about to launch. Eclipse may need some cajoling in order to include a non-plugin project in the classpath -- if this doesn't work, that's the first thing I'd try to look at.
You will now want to launch the debug configuration.
Depending on your Scala-IDE version, you may encounter a "Multiple launchers available -- Select one..." warning. I'd go for "Equinox Weaving enabled Eclipse Application Launcher".
Once inside the Eclipse instance being debugged:
Create the project you want to use the macro
Make sure to add a dependency on the binary output
Add a small usage example of your macro to the project in the workspace being debugged.
Cross your fingers
Build
In theory, the launching Eclipse instance will now pause the instance being debugged on your break point.
The instructions given by Nadavwr (just below) were helpful, and I recommend them to other people.
The key solution for me was to realise that there are two projects involved, the project that defines the macro, and the project that uses the macro. Rather foolishly I was trying to debug the project that defined the macro
So the instructions as given in the documentation are correct, I just had to make sure I was running them in the correct project: obvious of course.
For the benefit of other people, I found it very helpful to use a command line scalac to get the command line correct: much quicker editing that, and controlling which directory I was in, then in eclipse
The other thing to realise for people thinking of using Scala Macros are that the error messages from running scalac directly are MUCH better than those from eclipse.
Is the file .settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs part of the project or is it part of my personal eclipse configuration?
Should I add it to version control?
Yes, you should. If this file is not under version control, then you cannot create reproducable builds of the same project, because it is no longer self contained, but depends on your specific Eclipse installation and its settings.
If you import this project into another workspace (on your or any other machine), it may behave completely different, as the compiler compliance settings, the compiler warnings configuration and a lot of other stuff is suddenly missing or different. Chances are high that such a project suddenly shows warnings/errors in the new workspace, while it was completely fine before.
Note: This all also requires that you actually configure all Java related settings in the Project properties. Never use the Java compiler settings under Window -> Preferences if you want to have self contained projects.
Just to give a concrete example: If you have configured your projects compiler compliance level to Java 6, because you are using Java 6 specific features (like Override annotations on interfaces), then the project will create a lot of compile errors on other peoples machines. This is because the default compiler compliance level in every Eclipse workspace is Java 1.5, and in Java 1.5 that Override annotation is simply not allowed.
This doesn't have anything to do with whether you are developing closed source or open source, as indicated in the other answer.
Contrary to #nitind's opinion, no. You should not put any IDE-specific settings under version control. Except you are developing IDE features or plugins.
In case you really have mandatory team-wide IDE settings, putting them under version control would be a good idea, but IMO having mandatory team-wide settings is not a good idea in itself.
For all other cases, shared IDE settings are bad for portable builds, even with the same IDE, and useless at best for users of other IDEs.
EDIT: I should differentiate, depending on the target group of your project. If you are developing a closed source product in a team that works with eclipse, then keeping these preferences under version control is helpful and a good idea. If you are developing a library, closed or open source, or an open source project, I consider ignoring the preferences more appropriate and polite.
EDIT2: I'm afraid #Bananenweizen is misunderstanding what I am trying to say.
I know that these settings are the eclipse compiler settings. They are still IDE-specific in the sense that they won't have any effect in Netbeans or IntelliJ as they won't have any impact on ant or maven builds from the command line.
Yes, leaving these setting out of version control can bring you many red wavy lines in eclipse on a different machine. It won't, if it's a maven project with a set source level by the way, I'm not sure about ant.
Eclipse is not building the projects by itself - it builds them with ant if it's an eclispe or an ant project, or with maven if it's a maven project. Both ant and maven have specific settings for the source version that do not depend on IDEs.
And this is where these settings ought to be - in the build file. And the build file should be under source control. The exceptions I mentioned earlier still apply.
EDIT 2020.03.15 #howlger informed me that the usability of these formerly eclipse-exclusive files has improved. They can be used in VSCode and maybe IntelliJ. This improves their chances of being useful across IDEs and may change your decision towards sharing them.
IMO, the files are mixing concerns. While I support source level and code formatting as being part of the build, I consider issue highlighting rules, save actions and similar concerns to be out-of-scope. If possible, I separate those, sharing the former by putting them into the build definition, but not the latter.
Here is the problem with putting it under version control....
If you import and open a project, Eclipse insists when IProject.open(...) is called on touching the file in the .settings folder... and this is before you can register the team provider on the IProject object. That means validateEdit won't fire and you get annoying errors whether you click "yes" or "no" on the popup asking "do you want to make it writeable?" That's all well and good for optimistic file-locking providers, but no so great for the "pessimistic" ones. For us this is just been yet another eclipse annoyance.
If it's up to me, there is no way I'd put these in source control.
The answer is "yes" and here you find the motivation for it and the proper way to do it: watch the talk "Committing IDE meta files: misconceptions, misunderstandings, and solutions." or look at the corresponding slides from EclipseCon Europe 2015 by Aurélien Pupier #apupier (Senior Software Engineer, Eclipse specialist).
example:
For logging, my code uses log4j. but other jars my code is dependent upon, uses slf4j instead. So both jars must be in the build path. Unfortunately, its possible for my code to directly use (depend on) slf4j now, either by context-assist, or some other developers changes. I would like any use of slf4j to show up as an error, but my application (and tests) will still need it in the classpath when running.
explanation:
I'd like to find out if this is possible in eclipse. This scenario happens often for me. I'll have a large project, that uses alot of 3rd party libraries. And of course those 3rd party jars have their own dependencies as well. So I have to include all dependencies in the classpath ("build path" in eclipse) for the application and its tests to compile and run (from within eclipse).
But I don't want my code to use all of those jars, just the few direct dependencies I've decided upon myself. So if my code accidentally uses a dependency of a dependency, I want it to show up as a compilation error. Ideally, as class not found, but any error would do.
I know I can manually configure the classpath when running outside of eclipse, and even within eclipse I can modify the classpath for a specific class I'm running (in the run configurations), but thats not manageable if you run alot of individual test cases, or have alot of main() classes.
It sounds like your project has enough dependency relationships that you might consider structuring it with OSGi bundles (plug-ins). Each bundle gets its own classloader and gets to specify what bundles (and optionally what version ranges, etc.) it depends on, what packages it exports, whether it re-exports stuff from its dependencies, etc.
Eclipse itself is structured out of Eclipse plug-ins and fragments, which are just OSGi bundles with an optional tiny bit of additional Eclipse wiring (plugin.xml, which is used to declare Eclipse "extension points" and "extensions") attached. Eclipse thus has fairly good tooling for creating and managing bundles built-in (via the Plug-in Development Environment). Much of what you find out there may lead you to conflate "OSGi bundle" with "plug-in that extends the Eclipse IDE", but the two concepts are quite separable.
The Eclipse tooling does distinguish rather clearly (and sometimes annoyingly, but in the "helpful medicine" way) between the bundles in your build environment vs. the bundles that a particular run configuration includes.
After a few years of living in OSGi land, the default Java "flat classpath" feels weird and even kind of broken to me, largely because (as you've experienced) it throws all JARs into one giant arena and hopes they can sort of work things out. The OSGi environment gives me a lot more control over dependency relationships, and as a "side effect" also naturally demands clarification of those relationships. Between these clear declarations and the tooling's enforcement of them, the project's structure is more obvious to everyone on the team.
if my code accidentally uses a dependency of a dependency, I want it to show up as a compilation error. Ideally, as class not found, but any error would do.
Put your code in one plug-in, your direct dependencies in other plug-ins, their dependencies in other plug-ins, etc. and declare each plug-in's dependencies. Eclipse will immediately do exactly what you want. You won't be offered dependencies' dependencies' contents in autocompletes; you'll get red squiggles and build errors; etc.
Why not use access rules to keep your code clean?
It looks like it would better be managed with maven, integrated in eclipse with m2eclipse.
That way, you can only execute part of the maven build lifecycle, and you can manage separate set of dependencies per build steps.
In my experience it helps to be more resrictive, I made the team filling out (paper) forms why this jar is needed and what license...
and they did rather type in a few lines of code instead of drag along 20 jars to open a file using only one line of code, or another fancy 'feature'.
Using maven could help for a while, but when you first spot jars having names like nightly-build or snapshot, you will know you're in jar-hell.
conclusion: Choose dependencies well
Would using the slf4j-over-log4j jar be useful? That allows using slf4j with actual logging going to log4j.