Gendarme Google Group

Re: AvoidLackOfCohesionOfMethodsRule evaluating on Visual Basic Code

cof...@gmail.com (mark) — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 14:36:39 UT

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]

Re: AvoidLackOfCohesionOfMethodsRule evaluating on Visual Basic Code

hanson.and...@gmail.com (Andrew Hanson) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:57:56 UT

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?

AvoidLackOfCohesionOfMethodsRule evaluating on Visual Basic Code

hanson.and...@gmail.com (Andrew Hanson) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 16:31:40 UT

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

Getting an exception in gendarme while analyzing a c# application using sonar

vishnu.vis2...@gmail.com (vishnu) — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:50:51 UT

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

Re: [gendarme] Re: Contradiction enter the rules AvoidVisibleConstantFieldRule and PreferLiteralOverInitOnlyFieldsRule!!

skol...@gmail.com (Leszek Ciesielski) — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 14:23:25 UT

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.

Re: Contradiction enter the rules AvoidVisibleConstantFieldRule and PreferLiteralOverInitOnlyFieldsRule!!

eric.zeit...@gmail.com (Eric Zeitler) — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:34:04 UT

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

Contradiction enter the rules AvoidVisibleConstantFieldRule and PreferLiteralOverInitOnlyFieldsRule!!

robinwang...@gmail.com (Luping) — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:42:24 UT

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?

Contradiction between two rules AvoidVisibleConstantFieldRule and PreferLiteralOverInitOnlyFieldsRule!!

robinwang...@gmail.com (Luping) — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:47:00 UT

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.

Fwd: FW: [sonar-user] C# plug-in (Gendarme)

jfig...@gmail.com (Josh Figler) — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:42:45 UT

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:* u...@sonar.codehaus.org

Re: [gendarme] VisualCop | Gendarme for other artifacts..

m...@lcorneliussen.de (Lars Corneliussen) — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:28:16 UT

Hi Leszek! Or Skolima?
I'd like R# to take care of that, too :? Vote on this issue! :)
[link]
I found a different route we could go:
We could generate an msbuild file that imports the project, collects information and writes it to an xml (custom build task) - then, based on that we run validations. This xml would at the same time be the model, rule implementors would query against. If they need extra information to gather, they could provide an MSBuild-file that collects more information and adds it to a generic section in our model.

Re: [gendarme] VisualCop | Gendarme for other artifacts..

skol...@gmail.com (Leszek Ciesielski) — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:00:29 UT

Good idea! I'm kind of used to ReSharper doing some of this
(definitely not all that you are suggesting), but an Open Source tool
is always better.
Regarding parsing msbuild projects: I was doing some work with .proj
parsing recently and found
[link]

VisualCop | Gendarme for other artifacts..

m...@lcorneliussen.de (Lars Corneliussen) — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:57:24 UT

Hi guys,
on twitter, Sebastian asked me to elaborate more on my ideas around VisualCop.
Here we go.
As I'm tidying up the .NET solution for Apache NPanday (Maven + .NET, [link]) i started writing an Macro (just as a start to get to know the DevENV API) called VisualCop that validates the project+solution structure in VS.

Re: Rules based on Framework Design Guidelines and Dave's 'unofficial' Framework Design Guidelines?

imvidi...@gmail.com (vg) — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:29:34 UT

Here is the link to the documentation/rules for gendarme
[link]

Rules based on Framework Design Guidelines and Dave's 'unofficial' Framework Design Guidelines?

cof...@gmail.com (mark) — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:26:10 UT

These may have already been seen, considered and incorporated, but I was
wondering if the wealth of information in Microsoft's Design Guidelines for
Developing Class Libraries<[link]>and Dave's
'unofficial' Framework Design Guidelines<[link]>are part of Gendarme?

Re: CheckNewThreadWithoutStartRule

oleg.deri...@luup.com (Oleg Deribas) — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 12:58:50 UT

Hi,
I've added failing test for this case. It's in this pull request:
[link]