Skip to content
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

[CALCITE-6587] Support Java 23 and Guava 33.3.0 #3971

Closed
wants to merge 21 commits into from

Conversation

julianhyde
Copy link
Contributor

@libenchao, Can you review this? Part of it relates to deprecated methods in Avatica, and [CALCITE-5136].

I'd like to get this change into Calcite 1.38, but the Avatica fixes can wait a few weeks.

@julianhyde julianhyde marked this pull request as ready for review September 19, 2024 19:24
Copy link

Copy link
Member

@libenchao libenchao left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. (I finally recovered my Github account via disabling two-factor verification by Github staff)

@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static QueryBuilder analyze(RexNode expression) throws ExpressionNotAnalyzableEx
}
return e != null ? e.builder() : null;
} catch (Throwable e) {
Throwables.propagateIfPossible(e, UnsupportedOperationException.class);
Throwables.throwIfInstanceOf(e, UnsupportedOperationException.class);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

According to the Javadoc, throwIfInstanceOf is not a 1:1 replacement for propagateIfPossible.

The old code would throw other RunTime exceptions directly, while the new one wraps them.

This may be a good thing, but the commit message wording does not suggest behavioural changes.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wasn't aware that the methods have different behavior. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

However, there is no obligation to document behavioral changes that occur in 'behavior is unspecified' territory.

This block - like pretty much every catch (Throwable) block - is in that territory, and I didn't think too much about which use cases would be affected because - by definition - there are no documented, tested use cases.

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.

3 participants