-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 71
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
Change rule G-7240 to cover IN OUT
mode only
#81
Comments
Seems to me the description of G-7240 fits more a general rule of "Always explicitly state parameter mode". I'm considering converting to two rules: "Always explicitly state parameter mode." "Avoid using an IN OUT parameter as IN or OUT only." Still thinking :-) |
Splitting sounds good. First rule can be checked easily.
This rule make sense. However, it is difficult to check with static code analysis. Maybe we should mark the guidelines where we do not plan to implement a check. |
Good idea to mark rules which are implemented/supported by tools/validators. I'll give it a thought if I can't semi-automate that. So you say that rule G-7240 as described in the current Title ("Avoid using an IN OUT parameter as IN or OUT only.") is not currently implemented/checked by validator? |
This is an excerpt of the implementation. It checks "your" first rule only. if (!param.isIn() && !param.isOut()) {
warning(...);
} |
All the more sense to split the rule, since the implementation covers the current "Reason", but not the "Title" ;-) |
The title and the description of Rule G-7240 do not match. The description should concentrate on the combined mode
IN OUT
.Title:_
Description:
The implementation of the validator should change as well (currently it checks if
IN
orOUT
is defined as mode). This lead to some confusion. See discussion in #46.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: