26 lines
1.0 KiB
Plaintext
26 lines
1.0 KiB
Plaintext
|
=== Related: RSPEC-1104
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
=== On 2015-05-27T18:40:54Z Ann Campbell Wrote:
|
||
|
|
\[~tamas.vajk] I added C# to the targeted list without further editing in response to SONARCSANA-106. You may want to check the rule description over.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
=== On 2015-05-28T06:43:52Z Tamas Vajk Wrote:
|
||
|
|
\[~ann.campbell.2] shouldn't we have an exception for constant fields? And how about static ones? Those can't be part of an interface, so the reasoning doesn't apply to them.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
For static ones, we have another rule with a different reasoning: \http://jira.sonarsource.com/browse/RSPEC-2223
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
=== On 2015-05-28T11:26:31Z Ann Campbell Wrote:
|
||
|
|
\[~tamas.vajk] do you have any idea if those exceptions should apply to VB.NET too?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
=== On 2015-05-28T11:43:48Z Tamas Vajk Wrote:
|
||
|
|
\[~ann.campbell.2] Yes, this applies to VB.Net as well. There ``++static++`` is called ``++Shared++``, and constant variables are marked by ``++Const++``
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
=== On 2015-05-29T12:31:40Z Ann Campbell Wrote:
|
||
|
|
double-check me please, [~tamas.vajk]
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
=== On 2015-06-08T08:42:51Z Tamas Vajk Wrote:
|
||
|
|
LGTM
|
||
|
|
|