Update RSPEC

rules/S7462/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+{
+}

rules/S7462/rust/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+{
+  "title": "`mem::uninitialized` and `mem::zeroed()` should not be used to replace values",
+  "type": "BUG",
+  "status": "ready",
+  "remediation": {
+    "func": "Constant\/Issue",
+    "constantCost": "5min"
+  },
+  "tags": [
+    "clippy"
+  ],
+  "defaultSeverity": "Major",
+  "ruleSpecification": "RSPEC-7462",
+  "sqKey": "S7462",
+  "scope": "All",
+  "defaultQualityProfiles": ["Sonar way"],
+  "quickfix": "unknown",
+  "code": {
+    "impacts": {
+      "RELIABILITY": "MEDIUM"
+    },
+    "attribute": "LOGICAL"
+  }
+}

rules/S7462/rust/rule.adoc

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+== Why is this an issue?
+
+Using ``++mem::replace(&mut _, mem::uninitialized())++`` or ``++mem::replace(&mut _, mem::zeroed())++`` leads to undefined behavior even if the value is overwritten later. This is because the uninitialized value might be observed in the case of a panic, which can lead to unpredictable and dangerous consequences in your program.
+
+=== Code examples
+
+==== Noncompliant code example
+
+[source,rust,diff-id=1,diff-type=noncompliant]
+----
+use std::mem;
+
+fn may_panic(v: Vec<i32>) -> Vec<i32> { v }
+
+#[allow(deprecated, invalid_value)]
+fn myfunc(v: &mut Vec<i32>) {
+    let taken_v = unsafe { mem::replace(v, mem::uninitialized()) }; // Noncompliant
+    let new_v = may_panic(taken_v); // undefined behavior on panic
+    mem::forget(mem::replace(v, new_v));
+}
+----
+
+==== Compliant solution
+
+[source,rust,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
+----
+use std::mem;
+use take_mut::take;
+
+fn may_panic(v: Vec<i32>) -> Vec<i32> { v }
+
+fn myfunc(v: &mut Vec<i32>) {
+    let new_v = take(v, |old_v| may_panic(old_v)); // Compliant
+    mem::forget(mem::replace(v, new_v));
+}
+----
+
+== Resources
+=== Documentation
+
+* Clippy Lints - https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#mem_replace_with_uninit