|
Posted
over 13 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Alik Kurdyukov)
Hi, I have exactly the same exception. And the problem has something to relation with COM library connection. I just turned off Gendarme from sonar build. I'll try to investigate the problem if I build Gandarme.
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(mark)
I can't seem to find a reference to back me up, but it sounds like the problem is that the methods generated by accessors (get and set) may be counted by Gendarme. Rule doco is here (seems a little out dated):[link]
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Andrew Hanson)
I thought my issue was specific to Visual Basic, but it isn't I did the exact same thing in C# and I'm getting the same result. I've always found using POCO types useful, but maybe I'm wrong. Should I avoid creating these objects?
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Andrew Hanson)
I wrote a simple class to demo my problem. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding something and I have to just deal with it. The class has three properties in it (my example had one string, one integer, and one boolean) with backing fields. I compiled this in VS2008. I compile this class (and this class only) into a DLL and run the Gendarme
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(vishnu)
Today when I analyzed a C# application (source code size above 20 mb).I am getting an exception as shown below [INFO] [11:05:44.212] Sensor com.hello2morrow.sonarplugin.S onargraphSensor@11ae15a done: 370 ms [INFO] [11:05:44.212] Sensor CpdSensor... [INFO] [11:05:44.212] PmdEngine is used [INFO] [11:05:45.952] Sensor CpdSensor done: 1740 ms
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Leszek Ciesielski)
It should be possible to fix this conflict in the rule code. Visible (non-private) contants are bad, period. Init-only fields are bad, _except_ when you expose them through a visible (non-private) property.
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Eric Zeitler)
These rules are only contradictory on externally visible methods. The documentation mentions this (with lots of parenthetical explanations (: ), but I'm not positive the rule actually lowers the severity for this case. I can understand the frustration at having to wade through false positives and ignore them as such; In my projects there are
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Luping)
I have a problem with two rules AvoidVisibleConstantFieldRule and PreferLiteralOverInitOnlyField sRule. These two rule are contradictory. Anyone has the same problem? Do you have any suggestion? Thanks.
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Luping)
I have a problem with two rules AvoidVisibleConstantFieldRule and PreferLiteralOverInitOnlyField sRule. These two rule are contradictory. Anyone has the same problem? Do you have any suggestion?
|
|
Posted
almost 14 years
ago
by
[email protected]
(Josh Figler)
Hello, Please see the below email I have going with the folks over at Sonar. I'm wondering if this is a known issue, or if I'm doing something wrong, or if there is a workaround? Thanks, Josh ** ------------------------------ *From:* Figler, Josh *Sent:* Monday, November 21, 2011 10:28 AM *To:* [email protected]
|