sebthom/jstuff

Overriding or shadowing a variable declared in an outer scope can strongly impact the readability, and therefore the maintainability, of a piece of code. Further, it could lead maintainers to introduce bugs because they think they're using one variable but are really using another.

Noncompliant Code Example

class Foo {
  public int myField;

  public void doSomething() {
    int myField = 0;
    ...
  }
}

See

• CERT, DCL01-C. - Do not reuse variable names in subscopes
• CERT, DCL51-J. - Do not shadow or obscure identifiers in subscopes

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how hard the control flow of a method is to understand. Methods with high Cognitive Complexity will be difficult to maintain.

See

• Cognitive Complexity

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Overriding or shadowing a variable declared in an outer scope can strongly impact the readability, and therefore the maintainability, of a piece of code. Further, it could lead maintainers to introduce bugs because they think they're using one variable but are really using another.

Noncompliant Code Example

class Foo {
  public int myField;

  public void doSomething() {
    int myField = 0;
    ...
  }
}

See

• CERT, DCL01-C. - Do not reuse variable names in subscopes
• CERT, DCL51-J. - Do not shadow or obscure identifiers in subscopes

ThreadLocal variables are supposed to be garbage collected once the holding thread is no longer alive. Memory leaks can occur when holding threads are re-used which is the case on application servers using pool of threads.

To avoid such problems, it is recommended to always clean up ThreadLocal variables using the remove() method to remove the current thread’s value for the ThreadLocal variable.

In addition, calling set(null) to remove the value might keep the reference to this pointer in the map, which can cause memory leak in some scenarios. Using remove is safer to avoid this issue.

Noncompliant Code Example

public class ThreadLocalUserSession implements UserSession {

  private static final ThreadLocal<UserSession> DELEGATE = new ThreadLocal<>();

  public UserSession get() {
    UserSession session = DELEGATE.get();
    if (session != null) {
      return session;
    }
    throw new UnauthorizedException("User is not authenticated");
  }

  public void set(UserSession session) {
    DELEGATE.set(session);
  }

   public void incorrectCleanup() {
     DELEGATE.set(null); // Noncompliant
   }

  // some other methods without a call to DELEGATE.remove()
}

Compliant Solution

public class ThreadLocalUserSession implements UserSession {

  private static final ThreadLocal<UserSession> DELEGATE = new ThreadLocal<>();

  public UserSession get() {
    UserSession session = DELEGATE.get();
    if (session != null) {
      return session;
    }
    throw new UnauthorizedException("User is not authenticated");
  }

  public void set(UserSession session) {
    DELEGATE.set(session);
  }

  public void unload() {
    DELEGATE.remove(); // Compliant
  }

  // ...
}

Exceptions

Rule will not detect non-private ThreadLocal variables, because remove() can be called from another class.

See

• Understanding Memory Leaks in Java

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should, and that's the case with nested ternary operations. Nesting ternary operators results in the kind of code that may seem clear as day when you write it, but six months later will leave maintainers (or worse - future you) scratching their heads and cursing.

Instead, err on the side of clarity, and use another line to express the nested operation as a separate statement.

Noncompliant Code Example

public String getReadableStatus(Job j) {
  return j.isRunning() ? "Running" : j.hasErrors() ? "Failed" : "Succeeded";  // Noncompliant
}

Compliant Solution

public String getReadableStatus(Job j) {
  if (j.isRunning()) {
    return "Running";
  }
  return j.hasErrors() ? "Failed" : "Succeeded";
}

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how hard the control flow of a method is to understand. Methods with high Cognitive Complexity will be difficult to maintain.

See

• Cognitive Complexity

Fields in a Serializable class must themselves be either Serializable or transient even if the class is never explicitly serialized or deserialized. For instance, under load, most J2EE application frameworks flush objects to disk, and an allegedly Serializable object with non-transient, non-serializable data members could cause program crashes, and open the door to attackers. In general a Serializable class is expected to fulfil its contract and not have an unexpected behaviour when an instance is serialized.

This rule raises an issue on non-Serializable fields, and on collection fields when they are not private (because they could be assigned non-Serializable values externally), and when they are assigned non-Serializable types within the class.

Noncompliant Code Example

public class Address {
  //...
}

public class Person implements Serializable {
  private static final long serialVersionUID = 1905122041950251207L;

  private String name;
  private Address address;  // Noncompliant; Address isn't serializable
}

Compliant Solution

public class Address implements Serializable {
  private static final long serialVersionUID = 2405172041950251807L;
}

public class Person implements Serializable {
  private static final long serialVersionUID = 1905122041950251207L;

  private String name;
  private Address address;
}

Exceptions

The alternative to making all members serializable or transient is to implement special methods which take on the responsibility of properly serializing and de-serializing the object. This rule ignores classes which implement the following methods:

 private void writeObject(java.io.ObjectOutputStream out)
     throws IOException
 private void readObject(java.io.ObjectInputStream in)
     throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException;

See

• MITRE, CWE-594 - Saving Unserializable Objects to Disk
• Oracle Java 6, Serializable
• Oracle Java 7, Serializable

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Fields in a Serializable class must themselves be either Serializable or transient even if the class is never explicitly serialized or deserialized. For instance, under load, most J2EE application frameworks flush objects to disk, and an allegedly Serializable object with non-transient, non-serializable data members could cause program crashes, and open the door to attackers. In general a Serializable class is expected to fulfil its contract and not have an unexpected behaviour when an instance is serialized.

This rule raises an issue on non-Serializable fields, and on collection fields when they are not private (because they could be assigned non-Serializable values externally), and when they are assigned non-Serializable types within the class.

Noncompliant Code Example

public class Address {
  //...
}

public class Person implements Serializable {
  private static final long serialVersionUID = 1905122041950251207L;

  private String name;
  private Address address;  // Noncompliant; Address isn't serializable
}

Compliant Solution

public class Address implements Serializable {
  private static final long serialVersionUID = 2405172041950251807L;
}

public class Person implements Serializable {
  private static final long serialVersionUID = 1905122041950251207L;

  private String name;
  private Address address;
}

Exceptions

The alternative to making all members serializable or transient is to implement special methods which take on the responsibility of properly serializing and de-serializing the object. This rule ignores classes which implement the following methods:

 private void writeObject(java.io.ObjectOutputStream out)
     throws IOException
 private void readObject(java.io.ObjectInputStream in)
     throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException;

See

• MITRE, CWE-594 - Saving Unserializable Objects to Disk
• Oracle Java 6, Serializable
• Oracle Java 7, Serializable

It is highly recommended not to use wildcard types as return types. Because the type inference rules are fairly complex it is unlikely the user of that API will know how to use it correctly.

Let's take the example of method returning a "List<? extends Animal>". Is it possible on this list to add a Dog, a Cat, ... we simply don't know. And neither does the compiler, which is why it will not allow such a direct use. The use of wildcard types should be limited to method parameters.

This rule raises an issue when a method returns a wildcard type.

Noncompliant Code Example

List<? extends Animal> getAnimals(){...}

Compliant Solution

List<Animal> getAnimals(){...}

or

List<Dog> getAnimals(){...}

A for loop stop condition should test the loop counter against an invariant value (i.e. one that is true at both the beginning and ending of every loop iteration). Ideally, this means that the stop condition is set to a local variable just before the loop begins.

Stop conditions that are not invariant are slightly less efficient, as well as being difficult to understand and maintain, and likely lead to the introduction of errors in the future.

This rule tracks three types of non-invariant stop conditions:

• When the loop counters are updated in the body of the for loop
• When the stop condition depend upon a method call
• When the stop condition depends on an object property, since such properties could change during the execution of the loop.

Noncompliant Code Example

for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
  ...
  i = i - 1; // Noncompliant; counter updated in the body of the loop
  ...
}

Compliant Solution

for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {...}

Merging collapsible if statements increases the code's readability.

Noncompliant Code Example

if (file != null) {
  if (file.isFile() || file.isDirectory()) {
    /* ... */
  }
}

Compliant Solution

if (file != null && isFileOrDirectory(file)) {
  /* ... */
}

private static boolean isFileOrDirectory(File file) {
  return file.isFile() || file.isDirectory();
}

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

When @Overrides of synchronized methods are not themselves synchronized, the result can be improper synchronization as callers rely on the thread-safety promised by the parent class.

Noncompliant Code Example

public class Parent {

  synchronized void foo() {
    //...
  }
}

public class Child extends Parent {

 @Override
  public void foo () {  // Noncompliant
    // ...
    super.foo();
  }
}

Compliant Solution

public class Parent {

  synchronized void foo() {
    //...
  }
}

public class Child extends Parent {

  @Override
  synchronized void foo () {
    // ...
    super.foo();
  }
}

See

• CERT, TSM00-J - Do not override thread-safe methods with methods that are not thread-safe

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should, and that's the case with nested ternary operations. Nesting ternary operators results in the kind of code that may seem clear as day when you write it, but six months later will leave maintainers (or worse - future you) scratching their heads and cursing.

Instead, err on the side of clarity, and use another line to express the nested operation as a separate statement.

Noncompliant Code Example

public String getReadableStatus(Job j) {
  return j.isRunning() ? "Running" : j.hasErrors() ? "Failed" : "Succeeded";  // Noncompliant
}

Compliant Solution

public String getReadableStatus(Job j) {
  if (j.isRunning()) {
    return "Running";
  }
  return j.hasErrors() ? "Failed" : "Succeeded";
}

Non-static initializers are rarely used, and can be confusing for most developers because they only run when new class instances are created. When possible, non-static initializers should be refactored into standard constructors or field initializers.

Noncompliant Code Example

class MyClass {
  private static final Map<String, String> MY_MAP = new HashMap<String, String>() {

    // Noncompliant - HashMap should be extended only to add behavior, not for initialization
    {
      put("a", "b");
    }

  };
}

Compliant Solution

class MyClass {
  private static final Map<String, String> MY_MAP = new HashMap<String, String>();

  static {
    MY_MAP.put("a", "b");
  }
}

or using Java 9 Map.of:

class MyClass {
  // Compliant
  private static final Map<String, String> MY_MAP = java.util.Map.of("a", "b");
}

or using Guava:

class MyClass {
  // Compliant
  private static final Map<String, String> MY_MAP = ImmutableMap.of("a", "b");
}