rspec/rules/S3399/rule.adoc

55 lines
882 B
Plaintext

== Why is this an issue?
It is both suspicious and unusual to make direct assignments to super-class fields from a class constructor. Choosing to make such direct assignments, rather than invoking the ``++super++`` constructor that sets them, potentially bypasses important initialization.
=== Noncompliant code example
[source,text]
----
public class Parent {
protected int start;
public Parent() {
//...
}
public Parent(int start) {
this.start = start;
}
}
public class Child extends Parent {
public Child(int start) {
this.start = start; // Noncompliant
}
}
----
=== Compliant solution
[source,text]
----
public class Parent {
protected int start;
public Parent() {
//...
}
public Parent(int start) {
this.start = start;
}
}
public class Child extends Parent {
public Child(int start) {
super(start);
}
}
----