Replace Deprecated classes like Stack/Stream #1423
Conversation
| structs.top.initChoiceStatements += s"$indent ${arrayName}_initERD(instance, parent);" | ||
| structs | ||
| .top() | ||
| .initChoiceStatements += s"$indent ${arrayName}_initERD(instance, parent);" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest just inserting a comment at these statements indicating they are not covered by tests
E.g.,
// TODO: not convered by tests
But don't bother to try to figure them out.
| val x = resume( | ||
| producer, | ||
| dummy | ||
| ) // producer isn't sent anything. It's just resumed to get another value. | ||
| x match { | ||
| case EndOfData => Stream.Empty | ||
| case EndOfData => LazyList.empty |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add comment // TODO: no test coverage
| @@ -30,16 +30,16 @@ import scala.language.implicitConversions | |||
|
|
|||
| package object numerics { | |||
| implicit def toRicherInt(x: Int): RicherInt = new RicherInt(x) | |||
| implicit def toRicherInt(x: scala.runtime.RichInt) = new YetRicherInt( | |||
| implicit def toRicherInt(x: scala.runtime.RichInt): YetRicherInt = new YetRicherInt( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would suggest don't bother putting any comments into the passera library code about test coverage that is missing.
| * have been deprecated in 2.13. This allows us to maintain the same | ||
| * functionality as stack while using ListBuffer instead | ||
| * | ||
| * ArrayDeque is the recommended replacement but is not available in 2.12 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Drop comment.
Even if ArrayDeque is recommended, there is value in calling a stack a Stack. I would not recommend removing this even if ArrayDeque has all the functionality, because well, an ArrayDeque presumably also has non-stack additional behavior and if we are only using the Stack behavior then that is worth knowing, preferably by having this class/trait that enforces this.
I mean if I am reading code, and it uses a data structure that uses "double ended queue", then I'm assuming they chose that because they need more than just stack behavior. So it's misleading to me if someone only needs stack behavior, but uses a more general data structure which does not have 'stack' in its name.
| * TODO: If 2.12 support is dropped, this class should be deleted and ArrayDeque used | ||
| * instead | ||
| */ | ||
| class StackLike[T] { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
StackLike sounds like a name of a trait, not a concrete class. Is there a reason this can't just be Stack?
I would even suggest Stack1 is better than StackLike, because Stack1 suggests the name of a concrete instantiable class.
- remove TransientParam class, replace with just @transient - replace deprecated Stream with LazyList - rename iterator to eventIterator since Iterator trait now defines iterator field - .toIterator -> .iterator - update collection converters for 2.13, add compat class to enable for 2.12 - remove additional implicitCoversions/reflectiveCalls imports since it causes an unused import error in 2.13 - replace mutable.ArrayStack/Stack with custom Stack class that is backed by ListBuffer - replace deprecated Proxy class with overrides to toString, hashCode and equals - non-explicit implicit return types are deprecated in 2.13 - parseString is required for 2.13 extenders of Numeric, set to None - add comments about code not covered by tests DAFFODIL-2152
olabusayoT
force-pushed
the
daf-2152-replace-deprecated-classes
branch
from
23fccd5 to
ccd6f5c
Compare
DAFFODIL-2152