typetools / typetools/checker-framework

consider a more statically typed stub alternative

Open
#4,611 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Java
Stars
1.1k
Forks
440
Avg merge
1d 12h
Merged PRs (30d)
134

Description

due to incompatibilities between nullaway and checkerframework I find myself forced to choose between them. Currently, I haven't decided. However, it would appear that the stubs alternative for nullaway is a bit more statically typed, I suspect one could even go a bit further, more compile-time safety would be nice, especially given #4586 and whatever problem where the stub isn't being used in https://github.com/typetools/checker-framework/issues/4587#issuecomment-829263699

https://github.com/uber/NullAway/blob/master/sample-library-model/src/main/java/com/uber/modelexample/ExampleLibraryModels.java

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with the linked NullAway ExampleLibraryModels.java and investigate the incompatibilities described with NullAway and Checker Framework, including #4586 and the referenced Checker Framework issue 4587 comment. Clarify the desired statically typed stub design and how compile-time safety would be assessed; the issue is done only after a concrete approach and validation criteria are agreed.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
java
Domain
devtools
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
20/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.