rspec/rules/S1270/rule.adoc

34 lines
725 B
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

== Why is this an issue?
2021-01-27 13:42:22 +01:00
Explicitly specifying a ``++void++`` parameter list is required in C, but optional in {cpp}. Using ``++void++`` for a parameter-less function decreases its readability. The at-a-glance impression is that the function _does_ take a parameter, and it takes a second look to ascertain that it does not. Therefore the more compact notation is preferred.
2020-06-30 12:47:33 +02:00
=== Noncompliant code example
2020-06-30 12:47:33 +02:00
2022-02-04 17:28:24 +01:00
[source,text]
2020-06-30 12:47:33 +02:00
----
int fun(void);
int fun(void) {
...
}
----
=== Compliant solution
2020-06-30 12:47:33 +02:00
2022-02-04 17:28:24 +01:00
[source,text]
2020-06-30 12:47:33 +02:00
----
int fun();
int fun() {
...
}
----
== Resources
2021-01-26 14:30:57 +01:00
* https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/036324/CppCoreGuidelines.md#Rl-void[{cpp} Core Guidelines NL.25] - Don't use void as an argument type