rspec/rules/S3376/rule.adoc

== Why is this an issue?

Adherence to the standard naming conventions makes your code not only more readable, but more usable. For instance, ``++class FirstAttribute : Attribute++`` can be used simply with ``++First++``, but you must use the full name for ``++class AttributeOne : Attribute++``.


This rule raises an issue when classes extending ``++Attribute++``, ``++EventArgs++``, or ``++Exception++``, do not end with their parent class names.


=== Noncompliant code example

[source,text]
----
class AttributeOne : Attribute  // Noncompliant
{
}
----


=== Compliant solution

[source,text]
----
class FirstAttribute : Attribute 
{
}
----


=== Exceptions

If a class' direct base class doesn't follow the convention, then no issue is reported on the class itself, regardless of whether or not it conforms to the convention.

[source,text]
----
class Timeout : Exception // Noncompliant
{
}
class ExtendedTimeout : Timeout // Ignored; doesn't conform to convention, but the direct base doesn't conform either
{
}
----