Adobe-Consulting-Services/acs-aem-commons

Generic types shouldn't be used raw (without type parameters) in variable declarations or return values. Doing so bypasses generic type checking, and defers the catch of unsafe code to runtime.

Noncompliant Code Example

List myList; // Noncompliant
Set mySet; // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

List<String> myList;
Set<? extends Number> mySet;

Generic types shouldn't be used raw (without type parameters) in variable declarations or return values. Doing so bypasses generic type checking, and defers the catch of unsafe code to runtime.

Noncompliant Code Example

List myList; // Noncompliant
Set mySet; // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

List<String> myList;
Set<? extends Number> mySet;

Generic types shouldn't be used raw (without type parameters) in variable declarations or return values. Doing so bypasses generic type checking, and defers the catch of unsafe code to runtime.

Noncompliant Code Example

List myList; // Noncompliant
Set mySet; // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

List<String> myList;
Set<? extends Number> mySet;

Unused parameters are misleading. Whatever the values passed to such parameters, the behavior will be the same.

Noncompliant Code Example

void doSomething(int a, int b) {     // "b" is unused
  compute(a);
}

Compliant Solution

void doSomething(int a) {
  compute(a);
}

Exceptions

The rule will not raise issues for unused parameters:

• that are annotated with @javax.enterprise.event.Observes
• in overrides and implementation methods
• in interface default methods
• in non-private methods that only throw or that have empty bodies
• in annotated methods, unless the annotation is @SuppressWarning("unchecked") or @SuppressWarning("rawtypes"), in which case the annotation will be ignored
• in overridable methods (non-final, or not member of a final class, non-static, non-private), if the parameter is documented with a proper javadoc.

@Override
void doSomething(int a, int b) {     // no issue reported on b
  compute(a);
}

public void foo(String s) {
  // designed to be extended but noop in standard case
}

protected void bar(String s) {
  //open-closed principle
}

public void qix(String s) {
  throw new UnsupportedOperationException("This method should be implemented in subclasses");
}

/**
 * @param s This string may be use for further computation in overriding classes
 */
protected void foobar(int a, String s) { // no issue, method is overridable and unused parameter has proper javadoc
  compute(a);
}

See

• CERT, MSC12-C. - Detect and remove code that has no effect or is never executed

Generic types shouldn't be used raw (without type parameters) in variable declarations or return values. Doing so bypasses generic type checking, and defers the catch of unsafe code to runtime.

Noncompliant Code Example

List myList; // Noncompliant
Set mySet; // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

List<String> myList;
Set<? extends Number> mySet;

Unused parameters are misleading. Whatever the values passed to such parameters, the behavior will be the same.

Noncompliant Code Example

void doSomething(int a, int b) {     // "b" is unused
  compute(a);
}

Compliant Solution

void doSomething(int a) {
  compute(a);
}

Exceptions

The rule will not raise issues for unused parameters:

• that are annotated with @javax.enterprise.event.Observes
• in overrides and implementation methods
• in interface default methods
• in non-private methods that only throw or that have empty bodies
• in annotated methods, unless the annotation is @SuppressWarning("unchecked") or @SuppressWarning("rawtypes"), in which case the annotation will be ignored
• in overridable methods (non-final, or not member of a final class, non-static, non-private), if the parameter is documented with a proper javadoc.

@Override
void doSomething(int a, int b) {     // no issue reported on b
  compute(a);
}

public void foo(String s) {
  // designed to be extended but noop in standard case
}

protected void bar(String s) {
  //open-closed principle
}

public void qix(String s) {
  throw new UnsupportedOperationException("This method should be implemented in subclasses");
}

/**
 * @param s This string may be use for further computation in overriding classes
 */
protected void foobar(int a, String s) { // no issue, method is overridable and unused parameter has proper javadoc
  compute(a);
}

See

• CERT, MSC12-C. - Detect and remove code that has no effect or is never executed

Abstract classes should not have public constructors. Constructors of abstract classes can only be called in constructors of their subclasses. So there is no point in making them public. The protected modifier should be enough.

Noncompliant Code Example

public abstract class AbstractClass1 {
    public AbstractClass1 () { // Noncompliant, has public modifier
        // do something here
    }
}

Compliant Solution

public abstract class AbstractClass2 {
    protected AbstractClass2 () {
        // do something here
    }
}

Conditional expressions which are always true or false can lead to dead code. Such code is always buggy and should never be used in production.

Noncompliant Code Example

a = false;
if (a) { // Noncompliant
  doSomething(); // never executed
}

if (!a || b) { // Noncompliant; "!a" is always "true", "b" is never evaluated
  doSomething();
} else {
  doSomethingElse(); // never executed
}

Exceptions

This rule will not raise an issue in either of these cases:

• When the condition is a single final boolean

final boolean debug = false;
//...
if (debug) {
  // Print something
}

• When the condition is literally true or false.

if (true) {
  // do something
}

In these cases it is obvious the code is as intended.

See

• MITRE, CWE-570 - Expression is Always False
• MITRE, CWE-571 - Expression is Always True
• CERT, MSC12-C. - Detect and remove code that has no effect or is never executed

Abstract classes should not have public constructors. Constructors of abstract classes can only be called in constructors of their subclasses. So there is no point in making them public. The protected modifier should be enough.

Noncompliant Code Example

public abstract class AbstractClass1 {
    public AbstractClass1 () { // Noncompliant, has public modifier
        // do something here
    }
}

Compliant Solution

public abstract class AbstractClass2 {
    protected AbstractClass2 () {
        // do something here
    }
}

Unused parameters are misleading. Whatever the values passed to such parameters, the behavior will be the same.

Noncompliant Code Example

void doSomething(int a, int b) {     // "b" is unused
  compute(a);
}

Compliant Solution

void doSomething(int a) {
  compute(a);
}

Exceptions

The rule will not raise issues for unused parameters:

• that are annotated with @javax.enterprise.event.Observes
• in overrides and implementation methods
• in interface default methods
• in non-private methods that only throw or that have empty bodies
• in annotated methods, unless the annotation is @SuppressWarning("unchecked") or @SuppressWarning("rawtypes"), in which case the annotation will be ignored
• in overridable methods (non-final, or not member of a final class, non-static, non-private), if the parameter is documented with a proper javadoc.

@Override
void doSomething(int a, int b) {     // no issue reported on b
  compute(a);
}

public void foo(String s) {
  // designed to be extended but noop in standard case
}

protected void bar(String s) {
  //open-closed principle
}

public void qix(String s) {
  throw new UnsupportedOperationException("This method should be implemented in subclasses");
}

/**
 * @param s This string may be use for further computation in overriding classes
 */
protected void foobar(int a, String s) { // no issue, method is overridable and unused parameter has proper javadoc
  compute(a);
}

See

• CERT, MSC12-C. - Detect and remove code that has no effect or is never executed

Abstract classes should not have public constructors. Constructors of abstract classes can only be called in constructors of their subclasses. So there is no point in making them public. The protected modifier should be enough.

Noncompliant Code Example

public abstract class AbstractClass1 {
    public AbstractClass1 () { // Noncompliant, has public modifier
        // do something here
    }
}

Compliant Solution

public abstract class AbstractClass2 {
    protected AbstractClass2 () {
        // do something here
    }
}

Conditional expressions which are always true or false can lead to dead code. Such code is always buggy and should never be used in production.

Noncompliant Code Example

a = false;
if (a) { // Noncompliant
  doSomething(); // never executed
}

if (!a || b) { // Noncompliant; "!a" is always "true", "b" is never evaluated
  doSomething();
} else {
  doSomethingElse(); // never executed
}

Exceptions

This rule will not raise an issue in either of these cases:

• When the condition is a single final boolean

final boolean debug = false;
//...
if (debug) {
  // Print something
}

• When the condition is literally true or false.

if (true) {
  // do something
}

In these cases it is obvious the code is as intended.

See

• MITRE, CWE-570 - Expression is Always False
• MITRE, CWE-571 - Expression is Always True
• CERT, MSC12-C. - Detect and remove code that has no effect or is never executed