Re: Way to optimize this?
Contrary to your subject line, this is not an optimization issue.
laredotornado wrote:
I'm using Java 1.5. My code checker (PMD plug-in, part of Eclipse
Galileo), is complaining about the line "Integer fileCount = null;" in
the following ...
public Integer getVendorRequestFileDigestCount(final
YouthfulDriverVendor vendor,
=
final String
Please, please, please don't indent so heavily.
requestFileDigest) {
Integer fileCount = null;
Since you never use this 'null' value it's superfuous and you
shouldn't assign it..
final Session session = sessionFactory.openSession();
Aren't there exceptions you need to catch here?
try {
fileCount = (Integer)
Why is this cast necessary? What is the return type of 'uniqueResult
()'?
session. createCriteria(AddressRequestFile=
..class)
Weird spacing.
.add(Restrictions.eq("requestFileDigest", requestFileDige=
st))
.add(Restrictions.eq("vendor", vendor))
.add(Restrictions.gt("processingResult", 0))
.add(Restrictions.isNotNull("processingDate"))
.setProjection(Projections.rowCount()).uniqueResult();
} finally {
session.close();
}
return fileCount;
}
with the complaint, "Found 'DD' -- anomaly for 'fileCount', lines
123-126". Evidently, it doesn't like the fact that the value of the
variable "fileCount" changes. But I don't know how to rewrite this
code block to satisfy the code checker. Do you?
That "code checker" sure gives you obscure, uninformative messages,
doesn't it?
Switch to FindBugs.
I don't know how you read that it doesn't "like" the change to the
'fileCount' variable from that message. Since you don't even indicate
what the line numbers are, it's impossible for us to know anything
about that message. What are lines 123-126, hm?
Incomplete questions can lead to incomplete answers.
I'm going to ignore your "code checker" and just talk about good
sense. It is perfectly fine to reassign values to non-final
variables.
You should minimize the scope of variables, however. You can declare
'fileCount' inside the 'try' block, or eliminate it altogether.
--
Lew