16f6c0aecf
Inline adoc files when they are included exactly once. Also fix language tags because this inlining gives us better information on what language the code is written in.
88 lines
2.1 KiB
Plaintext
88 lines
2.1 KiB
Plaintext
== Why is this an issue?
|
|
|
|
Unused parameters are misleading. Whatever the values passed to such parameters, the behavior will be the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This rule raises an issue when a ``++private++`` method or constructor of a class/struct takes a parameter without using it.
|
|
|
|
=== Noncompliant code example
|
|
|
|
[source,csharp]
|
|
----
|
|
private void DoSomething(int a, int b) // "b" is unused
|
|
{
|
|
Compute(a);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
private void DoSomething2(int a) // value of "a" is unused
|
|
{
|
|
a = 10;
|
|
Compute(a);
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
=== Compliant solution
|
|
|
|
[source,csharp]
|
|
----
|
|
private void DoSomething(int a)
|
|
{
|
|
Compute(a);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
private void DoSomething2()
|
|
{
|
|
var a = 10;
|
|
Compute(a);
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
=== Exceptions
|
|
|
|
This rule doesn't raise any issue in the following contexts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
* The ``++this++`` parameter of extension methods.
|
|
* Methods decorated with attributes.
|
|
* Empty methods.
|
|
* Methods which only throw ``++NotImplementedException++``.
|
|
* Main methods.
|
|
* ``++virtual++``, ``++override++`` methods.
|
|
* interface implementations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
|
|
|
|
'''
|
|
== Implementation Specification
|
|
(visible only on this page)
|
|
|
|
=== Message
|
|
|
|
* Remove this unused method parameter "{0}".
|
|
* Remove this parameter "{0}", whose value is ignored in the method.
|
|
|
|
|
|
'''
|
|
== Comments And Links
|
|
(visible only on this page)
|
|
|
|
=== on 6 Mar 2017, 17:55:59 Amaury Levé wrote:
|
|
\[~freddy.mallet] Shall we ignore all empty methods or only public ones? If you say all of them, shall we also ignore empty Ctor?
|
|
|
|
About ``++static void Main(string[] args)++`` do you mean we also ignore the argument even if the method is not empty?
|
|
|
|
=== on 7 Mar 2017, 10:08:34 Jean-Christophe Collet wrote:
|
|
My suggestions:
|
|
|
|
* Ignore all empty methods including constructors (they should be flagged by another issue anyway)
|
|
* Yes, since Main(string[] args) is a 'non-negotiable' signature, we should ignore the case where 'args' is not used.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== on 7 Jan 2019, 16:44:49 Nicolas Harraudeau wrote:
|
|
The new description matches the existing implementation. It just explains more precisely what cases raise an issue.
|
|
|
|
include::../comments-and-links.adoc[]
|
|
|
|
endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]
|