@CheckReturnValue decoration for ApplicationContextAssert::getBean(s) methods

[scordio]

I suggest to decorate ApplicationContextAssert::getBean(s) methods with a @CheckReturnValue annotation so that incomplete statements like the following are spotted by static analysis tools like SpotBugs and IntelliJ IDEA:

assertThat(context).getBean(MyService.class);

To achieve this, no additional dependency is needed and Spring Boot Test can declare its own @CheckReturnValue annotation, similarly to what AssertJ and Mockito do.

I can raise a PR with the changes if the idea is accepted.

[scordio]

To achieve this, no additional dependency is needed and Spring Boot Test can declare its own @CheckReturnValue annotation, similarly to what AssertJ and Mockito do.

On second thought, Spring Boot Test might use org.assertj.core.util.CheckReturnValue directly since ApplicationContextAssert is an AssertJ-based implementation anyway.

[wilkinsona]

Thanks for the suggestion, @scordio. Using @CheckReturnValue sounds like a good option in this particular case. However, I wonder if we have other APIs where a similar annotation would be beneficial. A bit like nullability annotations for Kotlin, handling this inconsistently may create more problems than it solves. Flagging for team attention to see what everyone else thinks.

[mhalbritter]

I think this is a good idea if we do this consistently.

[philwebb]

I like the idea as well and error prone has been on the list of things to investigate for a while.

[sdeleuze]

This could be connected to spring-projects/spring-framework#28797 (tentatively planned for 6.1) if we extends its scope via jspecify/jspecify#200.

[sbrannen]

Regarding Eclipse IDE support, see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=572496.

[philwebb]

Marking this as blocked as we want to see what Framework do.

[rstoyanchev]

We are adding @CheckReturnValue to spring-core for 6.2, see spring-projects/spring-framework#33818.

[scordio]

Now that @CheckReturnValue has been introduced in Framework, would you like me to raise a PR for this topic or do you prefer to handle it within the team?

[philwebb]

A PR would be most welcome @scordio. This is something we'll probably aim to merge in 4.0 along with JSpecify support.