Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[ecocode challenge 2024/Hafnium] Improve rule EC67 : Handle case when i++ is located within a binary expression or a method parameter #42

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[ecocode challenge 2024/Hafnium] Improve rule EC67 : Handle case when i++ is located within a binary expression or a method parameter #42

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

hocinehacherouf
Copy link

@hocinehacherouf hocinehacherouf commented May 29, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Ignore rule EC67 when i++ is located within a binary expression or as a method parameter

Closes #4

@hocinehacherouf
Improve rule EC67 green-code-initiative#4
f95b8c0 
Ignore rule EC67 when i++ is located within a binary expression
@hocinehacherouf hocinehacherouf changed the title Improve rule EC67 : Handle case when i++ is located within a binary expression [ecocode challenge 2024/Hafnium] Improve rule EC67 : Handle case when i++ is located within a binary expression May 30, 2024
@hocinehacherouf hocinehacherouf changed the title [ecocode challenge 2024/Hafnium] Improve rule EC67 : Handle case when i++ is located within a binary expression [ecocode challenge 2024/Hafnium] Improve rule EC67 : Handle case when i++ is located within a binary expression or a method parameter May 30, 2024
@sonarqubecloud SonarQubeCloud
Copy link

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

dedece35
dedece35 requested changes May 31, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dedece35 dedece35 left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can you please check all tasks in DoD requirement (example of lack : no CHANGELOG.md file updated) ?
here : https://github.com/green-code-initiative/ecoCode-common/blob/main/doc/starter-pack.md#check-definition-of-done-for-new-rule-implementation

@hocinehacherouf
Copy link
Author

@dedece35 I updated the file CHANGELOG.md and I created a PR on the repo ecoCode-java-test-project: https://github.com/green-code-initiative/ecoCode-java-test-project/pull/33

@hocinehacherouf hocinehacherouf requested a review from dedece35 June 9, 2024 18:14
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has no activity for 30 days.
Please add a comment if you want to keep the issue open. Thank you for your contributions!

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Jul 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dedece35 dedece35 Awaiting requested review from dedece35

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
stale
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[EC67] rule improvment : "++i" statement is not so bad
2 participants
@hocinehacherouf @dedece35