Explicitly import org.jooq.Record to avoid ambiquity #782
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
It successfully builds and has started syncing. I'm using mariadb for this test. If it works I'll remove draft mode. |
|
Ok, this is working fine. Please consider merging. |
|
Closing to change branch. Will reference in new PR. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
VS Code's java extension was complaining that the Record in each of these files was ambiguous, which makes sense because there are several available libraries that offer Record all in use in the project, but only one is valid for this case. I assume it is the jooq version since all Record instances are found in what appears to be jooq code, so I explicitly imported it, which now removes all ambiguity Errors in the java compiler.