Repository navigation
SONARJAVA-7227 Preserve casts documenting potential precision loss in S1905 #6391
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
Open
nathsou
wants to merge
1
commit into
master
Choose a base branch
from
nathan/s1905-precision-casts
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+65
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Edge Case: Exemption also hides redundant casts of exactly representable constants
isPotentiallyLossyWideningConversiononly looks at the operand and target types. That means anyint→floatorlong→float/doublecast is now exempt, including casts of compile-time constants whose values are exactly representable, such asfloat f = (float) 0;ordouble d = (double) 1L;. S9395 never asks for those casts:S9395Check.isSafeConstant(S9395Check.java:156-171) skips integer constants with |v| ≤ 2^24 forfloatand long constants with |v| ≤ 2^53 fordouble. So these casts are still truly redundant, and S1905 stops reporting them without any rule conflict to justify it. The conversion can't lose precision there, so the cast documents nothing. To fix this, apply the same safe-constant exclusion here: keep reporting whenExpressionUtils.resolveAsConstant(tree.expression())gives a value inside the exact range. The simplest way is to share S9395'sisLossyWideningConversion/isSafeConstantlogic. Also add a Noncompliant sample likefloat f = (float) 1;.Skip the exemption for constants that convert exactly, matching S9395:
Check the box to apply the fix or reply for a change | Was this helpful? React with 👍 / 👎
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this looks correct to me
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I checked
RedundantTypeCastCheck.java:98-104againstS9395Check.isSafeConstant(lines 156-172), and the finding still holds.isPotentiallyLossyWideningConversionlooks only at the source and target types. A cast like(float) 0or(double) 1Lis therefore exempted from S1905, even though S9395 would not ask for it:isSafeConstanttreats those constants as exactly representable (|v| ≤ 2^24 for float, ≤ 2^53 for double). So S1905 stops reporting casts that really are redundant and S9395 doesn't require.If you want to keep this as is, the trade-off is losing those true positives. If you'd rather fix it, I can apply the same constant check here and add a
float f = (float) 1; // Noncompliantsample. Reply "fix this" and I'll make the change.