rspec/rules/S1186/java/rule.adoc

There are several reasons for a method not to have a method body:


* It is an unintentional omission, and should be fixed to prevent an unexpected behavior in production.
* It is not yet, or never will be, supported. In this case an ``++UnsupportedOperationException++`` should be thrown.
* The method is an intentionally-blank override. In this case a nested comment should explain the reason for the blank override.

== Noncompliant Code Example

[source,java]
----
public void doSomething() {
}

public void doSomethingElse() {
}
----

== Compliant Solution

[source,java]
----
@Override
public void doSomething() {
  // Do nothing because of X and Y.
}

@Override
public void doSomethingElse() {
  throw new UnsupportedOperationException();
}
----

== Exceptions

This does not raise an issue in the following cases:

* Non-public default (no-argument) constructors
* Public default (no-argument) constructors when there are other constructors in the class
* Empty methods in abstract classes
* Methods annotated with `@org.aspectj.lang.annotation.Pointcut()`


----
public abstract class Animal {
  void speak() {  // default implementation ignored
  }
}
----

ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]

'''
== Implementation Specification
(visible only on this page)

include::../message.adoc[]

'''
== Comments And Links
(visible only on this page)

include::../comments-and-links.adoc[]
endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]