rspec/rules/S1119/comments-and-links.adoc

=== is duplicated by: S3045

=== relates to: S907

=== relates to: S1439

=== is related to: S1219

=== on 10 Jul 2013, 09:48:32 Dinesh Bolkensteyn wrote:
Implemented by \http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARJAVA-199

=== on 16 Jun 2015, 13:42:28 Ann Campbell wrote:
CodePro: Break with Label

=== on 19 Jul 2016, 13:11:44 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] shouldn't we promote "targeted" languages from RSPEC-3045, which was marked as duplicating this one?

=== on 20 Jul 2016, 12:09:03 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] For C#, C, {cpp} and Objective-C we already have RSPEC-907 and for these languages (plus Python) the only way to use labels - is to use "goto", because in contrast with Java, JavaScript, Swift, Groovy and Flex only "goto" statement (not "break" and "continue") can transfer control to a label. From here I'm wondering what we should do with those RSPECs ? Don't know and didn't checked situation in VB.Net, PHP and others.

=== on 20 Jul 2016, 20:30:33 Ann Campbell wrote:
\[~evgeny.mandrikov] I've adjusted the languages of both rules, but beyond that I'm not sure there's anything to do with either of them...? I suspect you want to see one deprecated or superceded by the other, but for instance Java and Swift don't have ``++goto++`` and you say C-family languages + C# (I just learned) don't have labels without ``++goto++`` so I think this is a case of different rules for different language mechanisms.

=== on 21 Jul 2016, 10:38:32 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] I wasn't expecting something particular - simply pointed out on this fact and asked your opinion about it ;) I agree with your conclusion and changes.

=== on 20 Jan 2020, 15:09:02 Tibor Blenessy wrote:
I removed exception about loops because the exception made the rule equivalent to RSPEC-1439. I also removed it from built-in profiles in JS
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== is duplicated by: S3045`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== relates to: S907`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== relates to: S1439`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== is related to: S1219`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00
Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 10 Jul 2013, 09:48:32 Dinesh Bolkensteyn wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`Implemented by \http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARJAVA-199`

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 16 Jun 2015, 13:42:28 Ann Campbell wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`CodePro: Break with Label`

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 19 Jul 2016, 13:11:44 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`\[~ann.campbell.2] shouldn't we promote "targeted" languages from RSPEC-3045, which was marked as duplicating this one?`

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 20 Jul 2016, 12:09:03 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`\[~ann.campbell.2] For C#, C, {cpp} and Objective-C we already have RSPEC-907 and for these languages (plus Python) the only way to use labels - is to use "goto", because in contrast with Java, JavaScript, Swift, Groovy and Flex only "goto" statement (not "break" and "continue") can transfer control to a label. From here I'm wondering what we should do with those RSPECs ? Don't know and didn't checked situation in VB.Net, PHP and others.`

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 20 Jul 2016, 20:30:33 Ann Campbell wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			\[~evgeny.mandrikov] I've adjusted the languages of both rules, but beyond that I'm not sure there's anything to do with either of them...? I suspect you want to see one deprecated or superceded by the other, but for instance Java and Swift don't have ``++goto++`` and you say C-family languages + C# (I just learned) don't have labels without ``++goto++`` so I think this is a case of different rules for different language mechanisms.

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 21 Jul 2016, 10:38:32 Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`\[~ann.campbell.2] I wasn't expecting something particular - simply pointed out on this fact and asked your opinion about it ;) I agree with your conclusion and changes.`

Fix the comment display: rule-id, timestamp, GH visibility, link direction 2021-06-03 09:05:38 +02:00			`=== on 20 Jan 2020, 15:09:02 Tibor Blenessy wrote:`
Export comments and rspec-to-rspec links from jira 2021-06-02 20:44:38 +02:00			`I removed exception about loops because the exception made the rule equivalent to RSPEC-1439. I also removed it from built-in profiles in JS`