Why does Netbeans suggest improving the for?

Question

When I was doing this for Netbeans Showcased That Lamp of Tips to Improve Code on the Line of for. The suggestion was to reverse the condition. Follow the code:

Before of improvement:

for(int j = 0; j < selectionPaths.length; j++) {
   if( isDescendant(selectionPaths[j], path) )
      return true;
}

Afterward improvement suggested by Netbeans:

for(int j = 0; selectionPaths.length >= j; j++) {
   if( isDescendant(selectionPaths[j], path) )
      return true;
}

Update: after the "improvement" the program launches the exception ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException.

But then why did Netbeans give this suggestion if after accepting it the program gives error? Is there a specific reason or just a matter of code convention? Or is it a Netbeans failure?

Note: The Netbeans version is 8.0.1. The suggestion appears when the cursor is positioned in the condition, more precisely in the variable selectionPaths.

Answer 1

Netbeans analyzes only the code, not the context in which it is inserted, i.e., if your code can be refactored, it will give you a hint, but it won’t check all your code to suggest a "decent" refactoring. It is therefore the choice of the programmer whether or not to accept the choice of the IDE.

If you accept any suggestions from the IDE, keep in mind that a code reset will be required to make it plausible to function. In other words, in 70% of cases the Netbeans IDE gives some good suggestions, but in the other 30% it says some nonsense that will depend on the programmer’s experience to work.

As has already been said in the comments, this is subject to a grid discussion about tastes, there are people who prefer codes in one way and people who prefer otherwise, it is the same thing to have:

If() {

}

and

if()
{

}

Going to taste.

Answer 2

In that particular case it is for the sake of good practice and conventions.

Ex:

The way you did j < selectionPaths.length; if by an oversight put the sign = instead of < you would be assigning the selectionPaths.length at the j.

Already the suggested example selectionPaths.length >= j also assigns in javascript but in other languages or if selectionPaths.length was a method (selectionPaths.length()) and made a mistake by putting the = instead of >= would occur a syntax error being therefore easier to identify than a logic error of this level.