Skip to content

Change class loading and parsing warnings to debug messages. #5224

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged

Conversation

jeannielynnmoulton
Copy link
Contributor

Often, there are so many of these warnings that they lose all meaning as
warning, so they are now moved to debug.

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
  • My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ void java_bytecode_convert_classt::convert(
}
catch(const unsupported_java_class_signature_exceptiont &e)
{
warning() << "Class: " << c.name
debug() << "Class: " << c.name
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What's the verbosity level for debug?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's like this
1 - error
2 - warning
4 - result
6 - status
8 - stats
10 - debug

Copy link
Contributor

@thk123 thk123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this makes sense, I wonder if we should still produce one warning():

Unsupported java signatures were encountered. Some classes may be wrongly treated as not generic

If one of more warning would have previously been emitted.

@majakusber
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #5224 into develop will not change coverage by %.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #5224   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    67.37%   67.37%           
========================================
  Files         1157     1157           
  Lines        95087    95087           
========================================
  Hits         64068    64068           
  Misses       31019    31019           
Flag Coverage Δ
#cproversmt2 42.65% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
#regression 63.89% <66.66%> (ø) ⬆️
#unit 31.92% <88.88%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update be84cd1...979fb9d. Read the comment docs.

Often, there are so many of these warnings that they lose all meaning as
warning, so they are now moved to debug.
@jeannielynnmoulton jeannielynnmoulton merged commit 0115923 into diffblue:develop Feb 11, 2020
@jeannielynnmoulton jeannielynnmoulton deleted the jeannie/jbmcverbosity branch February 11, 2020 14:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants