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

PhDefault.java:65-68: It is necessary to call {@link... #3300

Open
0pdd opened this issue Jul 29, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

PhDefault.java:65-68: It is necessary to call {@link... #3300

0pdd opened this issue Jul 29, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@0pdd
Copy link

0pdd commented Jul 29, 2024

The puzzle 2251-4b006ee2 from #2251 has to be resolved:

* @todo #2251:90min It is necessary to call {@link ThreadLocal#remove()} on
* {@link PhDefault#NESTING} to prevent memory leaks. We should either find a place where this
* variable can be removed, or, if this is not possible
* (see https://github.com/objectionary/eo/pull/1930), come up with another solution.

The puzzle was created by Yegor Bugayenko on 29-Jul-24.

Estimate: 90 minutes, role: DEV.

If you have any technical questions, don't ask me, submit new tickets instead. The task will be "done" when the problem is fixed and the text of the puzzle is removed from the source code. Here is more about PDD and about me.

Copy link

@0pdd thanks for the report, here is a feedback:

  • The todo message is clear, but it could be made more concise. It currently includes a suggestion to look for a place to remove the variable or find another solution. A clearer formulation might be: "Call ThreadLocal#remove() on PhDefault#NESTING to prevent memory leaks. If no removal location is found, devise an alternate solution."
  • The todo message includes a link to a GitHub pull request for context. However, it could be more helpful to briefly summarize the issue or decision made in the linked pull request that is relevant to this todo. This will save contributors time and give them a clearer idea of what needs to be done.
  • The todo message does not clearly define what constitutes an acceptable "other solution" if a removal location cannot be found. Including criteria for success or examples of potential solutions could help guide contributors in resolving this todo.

Please fix the bug report in order it to get resolved faster.
Analyzed with gpt-4

@0pdd
Copy link
Author

0pdd commented Jul 29, 2024

@0pdd thanks for the report, here is a feedback: * The todo message is clear, but it could be made m...

I see you're talking to me, but I can't reply since I'm not a chat bot.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant