== Why is this an issue?

This rule applies whenever an ``++if++`` statement is followed by one or more ``++else if++`` statements; the final ``++else if++`` should be followed by an ``++else++`` statement.


The requirement for a final ``++else++`` statement is defensive programming.

The ``++else++`` statement should either take appropriate action or contain a suitable comment as to why no action is taken. This is consistent with the requirement to have a final ``++case _++`` clause in a ``++match++``.

=== Noncompliant code example

[source,scala]
----
if (x == 0) {
  doSomething
} else if (x == 1) {
  doSomethingElse
} 
----

=== Compliant solution

[source,scala]
----
if (x == 0) {
  doSomething
} else if (x == 1) {
  doSomethingElse
} else {
  throw new IllegalStateException
}
----

=== Exceptions

When all branches of an ``++if++``-``++else if++`` end with ``++return++``, ``++break++`` or ``++throw++``, the code that comes after the ``++if++`` implicitly behaves as if it was in an ``++else++`` clause. This rule will therefore ignore that case.


ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]

'''
== Implementation Specification
(visible only on this page)

include::../message.adoc[]

'''
== Comments And Links
(visible only on this page)

include::../comments-and-links.adoc[]

endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]