Repository navigation
Re-enable checkstyle enforcement - #3
Open
devin-ai-integration[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
devin-ai-integration[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
devin-ai-integration[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Author
🤖 Devin AI EngineerI'll be helping with this pull request! Here's what you should know: ✅ I will automatically:
Note: I can only respond to comments from users who have write access to this repository. ⚙️ Control Options:
|
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
checkstyle.fail.on.violationhas beenfalsesince the JDK 21 refresh (walmartlabs#159), which reported ~157 (currently 316) javadoc violations as "pre-existing debt to fix separately". Almost none of it is real debt: the Checkstyle 10 migration dropped properties from theJavadocMethodmodule without replacing them, silently turning on@param/@returnrequirements the project never had. Restoring the original intent leaves 22 genuine violations, which are fixed here, so enforcement goes back on.Compare against the rules as originally committed in c6c6bb4 —
scope=public,allowMissingParamTags,allowMissingThrowsTags,allowMissingReturnTag,allowedAnnotations, etc.scopewas renamed toaccessModifiers;minLineCount,allowThrowsTagsForSubclassesandallowMissingPropertyJavadocno longer exist and have no equivalent, but they only ever loosened the check further.allowedAnnotationsis also updated for the JUnit 5 lifecycle annotation names.That drops 316 → 22. The remainder are real and fixed individually:
@paramnames that no longer match the signature —@param transactionParsersonregisterTransactionSetParser(TransactionSetParser txParser), likewise inAbstractTransactionSetParserChainable, and@param errorDetail→errorDetailsinAbstractX12TransactionSetWithLoop.@throwstags that made Checkstyle's javadoc parser bail on the whole comment (surfacing as confusingAtclauseOrder/JavadocTagContinuationIndentationparse errors):@throws @{link PatternSyntaxException}(a typo'd{@link) and@throws {@link X12ParserException}.@throwswants an exception name, not a link.SegmentIteratorTest.The three
RightCurlyviolations were all} while (...)closings, which cannot satisfyoption=alone, soLITERAL_DOis dropped from that module's token list rather than reformatting valid do-while loops.No behavior change — only javadoc text, one import reorder, and build config. Verified:
mvn clean test→You have 0 Checkstyle violations.and 412 tests pass. I also confirmed the gate actually bites by temporarily adding a second top-level class, which fails the build withOneTopLevelClass.Link to Devin session: https://app.devin.ai/sessions/5280d76c516144ad88d3910c89b9ab3b
Requested by: @AllenGithu8