• bitchkat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    My experience is exactly the opposite. I don’t work for a FAANG but I’ve been around the block a bit. Its always the junior devs that try and add new warnings etc to the code base. I always require warnings to be cleaned up even if that means disabling specific instances (but not the whole rule) because the rule is flagging a false negative.

      • bitchkat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        4 months ago

        Warnings and errors are negatives not positive. So if it generates a warning that is OK, it’s a false negative.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      It boils down to desensitization/normalization. Warnings (and errors, of course, but tests as well) exist for a reason. If you don’t care about these gauge constructs are telling you, then they have no real diagnostic value. Getting into a place where you’re not looking at how your systems are actually running is generally a bad idea, especially in the long run.