Update rule.adoc

rules/S7455/rust/rule.adoc

@@ -1,44 +1,40 @@
-FIXME: add a description
-
-// If you want to factorize the description uncomment the following line and create the file.
-//include::../description.adoc[]
 
 == Why is this an issue?
+Looping over `x.next()` is misleading and can introduce subtle bugs. `x.next()` returns an `Option` which should be handled properly. When used in a loop, `Option` implements `IntoIterator`, resulting in unexpected behavior where only a single element or `None` might be processed, leading to difficult-to-diagnose errors.
 
-FIXME: remove the unused optional headers (that are commented out)
-
-//=== What is the potential impact?
-
-== How to fix it
-//== How to fix it in FRAMEWORK NAME
 
 === Code examples
 
 ==== Noncompliant code example
-
 [source,rust,diff-id=1,diff-type=noncompliant]
 ----
-FIXME
+for value in iterator.next() {
+    // Noncompliant: Looping directly over `iterator.next()`
+    println!("{value}");
+}
 ----
 
 ==== Compliant solution
 
 [source,rust,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
 ----
-FIXME
+for value in iterator {
+    // Compliant: Looping directly over `iterator`
+    println!("{value}");
+}
 ----
 
-//=== How does this work?
+Alternatively, handling the Option:
 
-//=== Pitfalls
+[source,rust,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
+----
+if let Some(value) = iterator.next() {
+    // Process the single value
+    println!("{value}");
+}
+----
 
-//=== Going the extra mile
+== Resources
+=== Documentation
 
-
-//== Resources
-//=== Documentation
-//=== Articles & blog posts
-//=== Conference presentations
-//=== Standards
-//=== External coding guidelines
-//=== Benchmarks
+* Clippy Lints - https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#iter_next_loop