-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
COM.DATA.Invariant #114
Comments
brigittehuynh
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 3, 2018
with a specific FunctionInvariant class. The test files are updated accordingly.
brigittehuynh
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 3, 2018
brigittehuynh
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 3, 2018
I chose to correct the false positive in the for (( ... )) construct by ignoring the code between for (( and done. |
Merged
Merged
begarco
pushed a commit
to begarco/i-CodeCNES
that referenced
this issue
Jan 25, 2020
…nto account with a specific FunctionInvariant class. The test files are updated accordingly.
begarco
pushed a commit
to begarco/i-CodeCNES
that referenced
this issue
Jan 25, 2020
begarco
pushed a commit
to begarco/i-CodeCNES
that referenced
this issue
Jan 25, 2020
…st updated accordingly
begarco
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 2, 2020
with a specific FunctionInvariant class. The test files are updated accordingly.
begarco
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 2, 2020
begarco
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 2, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Implementation of the rule COM.DATA.Invariant
Description
Known problems
False positives when using awk
Code :
awk 'BEGIN { FS = " "; StartType = 0; StartEnum = 0; typeName=""; }
Result: a violation of the rule is raisen on
typename
.False positive when using ++ in a loop
Code :
(( PREPAR_UNE_SEUL_FOIS++ ))
Function declaration
Description : The checker is not handling some types of functions declaration. The problem is the same one as defined for several rules in #49 .
State of the implementation
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: