-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
[EC67] rule improvment : "++i" statement is not so bad #4
Labels
Comments
in while(myValue){
// Your code here, change myValue
//increment
i++;
} |
pataluc
referenced
this issue
in max-208/ecoCode-java
May 29, 2024
In some cases, postfix increment may be intentional. Closes #4
pataluc
referenced
this issue
in max-208/ecoCode-java
May 29, 2024
In some cases, postfix increment may be intentional. Closes #4
pataluc
referenced
this issue
in max-208/ecoCode-java
May 29, 2024
In some cases, postfix increment may be intentional. Closes #4
pataluc
referenced
this issue
in max-208/ecoCode-java
May 29, 2024
In some cases, postfix increment may be intentional. Closes #4
hocinehacherouf
added a commit
to hocinehacherouf/ecoCode-java
that referenced
this issue
May 29, 2024
Ignore rule EC67 when i++ is located within a binary expression
This was referenced May 30, 2024
Draft
Open
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Describe the bug
The rule wants us to change "i++" to "++i" statement.
But often "i++" has a really functionnal usage like screenshot below.
Expected behavior
improve actual behaviour to detect if "i++" statement is used alone or not (example : in a concatenation string).
if alone, ok raise the issue. if not, don't raise issue because we don't know if "i++" has a functionnal usage or not.
Screenshots
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e5b86/e5b8687fd68e9b16242e29599bee770f6beaab29" alt="i++"
Software Versions
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: